Skip to main content

Full text of "Environmentally sensitive areas"

See other formats


FL3 

Ulachua 
.G142 
|80 
975 



1 
C.2 



envmonmmmcLT 
'sensmvE awas - igvs 



-♦•"•••»*- 



^/ UNIVERSITY '"V o 1 
OF : 2 

FLORIDA y'^ 



.*(tvi 




department of Gommunity development 



Gainesville , Florida 



m 



f^ 



ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS-197 5 



City of Gainesville Florida 

Department of Community Development June, 19 7 5 

The preparation of this report was financed in part through a 
comprehensive planning grant from the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development. CPA-FL-04-29-1070 



I 

E 



BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA 
SHEET 



1. Report No. 

GF DCD 7501 



3. Recipient's Accession No. 



4. Title and Subtitle 



ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS- 19 7 5 



5- Report Date 

June, 1975 



6. 



7. Author(s) 



Carleton J. Ryffel - principal author 



8. Performine Organization Rept. 

No. GF DCD 7501 



9. Performing Organization Name and Address 

Department of Community Development 

City of Gainesville, Florida 

P.O. Box 490 

Gainesville, Florida 32602 



10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. 

601.0 



11. Contract/Grant No. 

:pA-FL-04-29-1070 



12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 

Department of Housing and Urban Development 
451 Seventh Street, S.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20410 



13. Type of Report & Period 
Covered 

FINAL 



14. 



15. Supplementary Notes 



16. Abstracts 

Recognition of diminishing natural resources and the needs of an 
increasing population, prompted the undertaking of this study. Nine 
aspects or elements of the environment are discussed and each is 
graphically represented consistent with a weighting system developed for 
this study. A final map, based on the cumulative effect of the 
preceding maps, shows four priority classf ications of areas determined 
to be environmentally sensitive to alteration. The visual and 
numerical evaluation procedures used to determine priority areas was 
discussed in the text. Recommendations based on the final map are 
offered to reconcile growth and maintain as feasible, the environmentally 
sensitive areas. 



17. Key Words and Document Analysis. 17a. Descriptors 



17b. Identif icrs/Open-Ended Terms 

Environment (elements, characteristics) 

Sensitive Areas (mapping, priorities, evaluation methodology) 

Recommendations 



17c. COSATI Field/Group 



lli. Availability Statement 

Available from the National Technical 
Information Service; 528 5 Port Royal Rd 
Springfield, Virginia 22151 



FORM NTIS-35 (REV. 3-72) 



19. Security Class (This 
Report) 

UNCLASSIFIED 

20. Security Class (This 
Page 

UNCLASSIFIED 



21. 



No. of Pages 

106 



22. Price 



USCOMM-DC 14952-P72 



11 



city Commission 

Joseph W. Little, Mayor-Commissioner 
Aaron A. Green 
Russell W. Ramsey 
James G. Richardson 
W. S. Talbot 



City Plan Board 

John S. Winnie, Chairman 
Harry H. Daugherty 
Donna D. Faxon 
Ira J. Gordon 
Samuel N. Holloway 
Earl M. Scarborough 
Mrs. Daniel B. Ward 



City Manager 

B. Harold Farmer 

Department of Community Development 

Norman J. Bowman, Director 
Richard A. Kilby, Assistant Director 
Elmond B. Taylor, Housing Counselor 
Delores K. Newton, Administrative Secretary 

Planning Division 

Carleton J. Ryffel, Planner III 

Fred H. Flowers, Planner III 

John V. Carlson, Planner II 

V. Miles Patterson, Graphics Coordinator 

Don Brandes , Planning Aide I 

Louie Wilson, Administrative Clerk 

Glenn R. Edwards, Planning Aide 

Babette E. Herring, Secretary II 



111 



Acknowledgements 

The staff wishes to express their appreciation to the 
following individuals for their assistance on various 
chapters in this study. 

Mr. Mike Bordyn, County Forester (Vegetation chapter). 

Mr. Bill Hurst, County Pollution Control Officer (Geology 
and Lake Trophic Levels chapters). 

Mr. Stephen Nesbitt, Wildlife Research Biologist, Florida 
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (Wildlife chapter). 

Dr. Earl C. Pirkle, Professor and Chairman, Department of 
Physical Sciences, University of Florida (Geology 
chapter) . 



IV 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PAGE 



Abstract 

List of Tables 

List of Figures 

List of Appendices 

Introduction 

Preface 

Chapter I 



Chapter II 



Chapter III 



Chapter IV 



Chapter V 



Chapter VI 



Chapter VII 



Chapter VIII 



Chapter IX 



Geology 

Methodology 
References 

Soils 

Methodology 
References 

Slope 

Methodology 
References 

V>/etlands 

Methodology 
References 

Lake Trophic Levels 
Methodology 
References 

Flood-Prone Areas 
Methodology 
References 

Vegetation 

Methodology 
References 

Wildlife 

Methodology 
References 

Land Use 

Methodology 
References 



11 

vii 

viii 

ix 

1 

3 

7 

11 
13 

15 
16 
20 

21 
23 
26 

27 
29 
32 

33 
36 
40 

41 
42 
45 

46 
47 
52 

53 
54 
59 

60 
61 

64 



Table of Contents Continued 



PAGE 



Chapter X Environmentally Sensitive Areas 65 

Methodology 65 

Visual Step ' 67 

Numerical Step 67 

Recommendations 69 

Glossary of Terms 71 

Appendices 72 

Sources Consulted 93 

Other References 97 



VI 



LIST OF TABLES 



PAGE 



Table 1 - Summary of Soil Suitability for Urban 17 

Uses by Group 

Table 2 - The Effects of Different Slopes on 24 

Development 

Table 3 - Trophic Levels of Lakes in Metropolitan 

Gainesville 36 

Table 4 - Vegetation and Its Sensitivity to 

Change, Metropolitan Gainesville 47 

Table 5 - Soil Ranking with Regard to Wildlife 76 

Table 6 - Combination of Soil and Vegetation 81 

Table 7 - Combination of Soil/Vegetation and 

Land Use 81 

Table 8 - Site Evaluation Matrix 83 

Table 9 - Site Evaluation Matrix for a Priority 

1 Area 8 8 

Table 10 - Site Evaluation Matrix for a Priority 

2 Area 89 

Table 11 - Site Evaluation Matrix for a Priority 

3 Area 91 

Table 12 - Site Evaluation Matrix for a Priority 

4 Area 9 2 



Vll 



II 

ll 

II 



LIST OF FIGURES 

PAGE 

Figure 1 - Gainesville HUD Area 5 

Figure 2 - General Geology 10 

Figure 3 - General Soil Suitability 19 

Figure 4 - General Land Slope 25 

Figure 5 - General Wetlands 30 

Figure 6 - Aging Process of a Hypothetical Lake 34 

Figure 7 - Typical Natural Trophic Succession 35 

Figure 8 - Lake Trophic Levels 38 

Figure 9 - 100 Year General Flood-Prone Areas 43 

Figure 10 - General Vegetation 51 

Figure 11 - General Wildlife Suitability 55 

Figure 12 - General Land Use 62 

Figure 13 - Environmentally Sensitive Areas 66 

Figure 14 - Composite of Elements 68 

Figure 15 - Interrelationship of Factors Affecting 

Lake Metabolism 76 



Vlll 



i 



Appendix I 
Appendix II 
Appendix III 
Appendix IV 



LIST OF APPENDICES 



Methods of Minimizing Erosion, 
Sedimentation and Runoff 

Interrelationship of Factors 
Affecting Lake Metabolism 

Procedure Used for Developing 
the Wildlife Map 

Methodology Used to Determine 
Environmentally Sensitive 
Areas-with examples 



PAGE 



72 



74 



75 



82 



IX 



r 



r 

I' 
F 
I 

k 



f 
I 
I 
1 



I 



Introduction 

Man lives and functions within what is commonly referred 
to as an ecosystem. This system may be defined as a collection 
of relationships and linkages between living things and the 
ways in which these living things relate or react to the over- 
all environment. An ecosystem, if left undisturbed, is either 
in a state of equilibrium or disequilibrium. If the state is 
disequilibrium, then the ecosystem will strive to return to a 
balance point. 

In the context of urban growth, development and manmade 
alteration it is not difficult to enumerate areas of conflict 
or potential conflict with regard to the ecosystem. In order 
to bring these problems of conflict into clearer focus, it is 
helpful to consider two basic ecological laws: 

1. "No species encounters in any given habitat the 
optimum conditions for all its functions. "1 

In human terms, man tends to modify his habitat to satisfy 
his short-run environmental needs and desires. He removes re- 
sources from other places to satisfy himself. 

2. "Organic evolution is slower than environmental 
change on the average, and hence migration occurs."^ 

Environmental change may occur too rapidly for man's adap- 
tive ability and migration (the escape from change) may not 
suffice to solve the adaptive problems created. 



-'-Paul Dansereau, Future Environments of North America , (Garden 
City; 1966) pp. 459-460. 

^Ibid. 



f^ 



f 



i 



An alteration of a sector of the overall ecosystem, whether 
air, water or land related, is most often a result of a social 
or economic stimulus. While certainly many of these alterations 
are beneficial to man, these benefits are too frequently of a 
short-term nature which incur long-term "costs" not originally 
anticipated. It is especially important to recognize these costs 
in light of resource shortages which are beginning to be felt 
throughout the world. Better understanding of the natural systems 
will help enable individuals to carefully weigh costs vs. benefits 
in a broader context. 

There are some locations in the Gainesville area that are 
more sensitive to change than others. To effectively work within 
the tolerance limits of an ecosystem in order to minimize degra- 
dation of the environment and its quality, it is important to be 
aware of the location of these sensitive areas. 



Preface 

The purpose of this study is to define those areas which 
are environmentally sensitive for any of several reasons. 
Accompanying the text are maps which depict the elements of 
soils, geology, wetlands, wildlife, vegetation, flood prone 
areas, lake trophic levels, land use and slope. These 
individual maps are informative not only in themselves, but may 
be examined simultaneously to ascertain the degree and type 
of interactions between various elements. A map is presented 
at the end of this report illustrating the cumulative 
interactions of all the elements. This map represents 
environmentally sensitive areas within Metropolitan Gainesville. 

It is expected that the study will be useful to developers, 
property owners, planners and citizens in general since most 
of the environmental problem areas will be displayed on the 
maps. The user will be able to tell at a glance where these 
problem areas are and what might be expected. Furthermore, the 
study should be useful to decision-makers in that they will 
be better able to anticipate what types of problems might be 
encountered or result from land use changes or with changes in 
the intensity of development. 

This study is not intended to be a "no growth" tool or to 
unduly inhibit development, but it is a source of information 
to be used to accommodate both growth and environmental quality. 
The fact that an area is found to be environmentally sensitive 



does not necessarily mean that all types of development are 
inappropriate. What it does mean is that adequate provisions 
are called for to minimize impact and maximize environmental 
quality. 

Words in the text which are uncommon or might have a 
meaning different from everyday discourse will be marked with 
an asterisk (*) . The words so marked are defined in the 
glossary near the end of the report. 

The geographic area in this report includes the City of 
Gainesville and land adjacent to the City, approximately 135 
square miles. The boundary enclosing this area is referred to 
as the HUD line (See Fig. 1) . 

The maps, map codes and interpretations in this study have 
been carefully coordinated with the North Central Florida Regional 
Planning Council. Their publication entitled Natural Resources 
Study for Alachua County, Florida , includes all of Alachua 
County, but is generalized in the HUD area. The study by the 
Department of Community Development focuses on the HUD area and 
is, therefore, at the scale presented, in much greater detail. 

The primary differences between the two studies are scale-'- and 

2 
examined elements . However, these differences do no preclude 



The base map used by the Department of Community Development is 
at a scale of 1" = 2000'; by North Central Florida Regional 
Planning Council, 1" = 5280'. 

"^Some elements were deemed appropriate at the County scale, but 
not at the HUD scale. Example: Agriculture is a factor at the 
County level, but not at the HUD line scale. 




GAINESVILLE HUD AREA 



Figure 1 



joint use of these studies. The information encoded on a 
North Central Florida Regional Planning Council map is 
equivalent to information encoded on the Department of 
Community Development map. 

It should be made clear that due to map scale and 
information limitations, the maps contained herein are 
necessarily generalized. Accordingly/ small areas or single 
parcels should be evaluated individually. 

In order to publish the maps contained in this report, 
it was necessary to reduce them in size. One result of this 
procedure is a loss of detail. The original, full-size maps 
are available for inspection at the Department of Community 
Development. 



r' 



I 



Q 



Chapter I 
Geology 

History is replete with examples of structural damage or 
destruction sustained as a result of poor planning and failure 
to recognize geologic properties which were inappropriate for 
the stability of a building. Geologic formations, whether 
they are at or below the soil layer, have physical and chemical 
properties which distinguish them from one another. 

In the Metropolitan area of Gainesville, three geologic 
formations are differentiated; the Pleistocene Sands, Hawthorne 
formation and the Ocala group of limestone formations. All 
of these formations are of sedimentary origin. ^ Furthermore, 
each of these formations possess properties which deserve 
consideration before construction above them occurs. 

The Pleistocene Sands are usually well suited to development 
with the exception of localized occurrences of clay or organic 
matter, which should be avoided if possible. Areas where the 
water table is at or very near the surface should also be 
avoided because of possible foundation instability and/or 
groundwater* pollution. 

Although the Hawthorne formation is usually thought of 
as a heavy clay, it may vary in composition and include layers 



A formation of sedimentary origin is one which was formed by 
fragments of other rock, transported from their sources, and 
deposited in water. They may also be formed by precipitation 
from solution or from secretions of organisms. 



r 



of sandy clay or sandy phosphatic limestone as well. If the 
Hawthorne formation is encountered at or near the surface and 
when it possesses the heavy clay characteristic, it may impose 
development obstacles. One of these obstacles is that the 
areas are usually unsuitable for the use of septic tanks. Clays 
usually inhibit water from percolating into the earth; therefore, 
the surface stays wet longer after rainfall or flooding. 
Furthermore, the Hawthorne formation will usually possess a 
high shrink-swell potential which means that the clays expands 
upon exposure to moisture (usually rain) and contracts in dry 
periods. One approach to coping with this problem is to 
excavate the poorly suited clays and fill with more stable 
material such as sand. 

The Ocala formation is composed of various limestone 
formations which are usually soft, porous and permeable.^ In 
addition, this formation is part of the Floridian Aquifer.^ 
This aquifer is replenished or "recharged" by rainwater which 
percolates through the soil or other formations above it. Recharge, 



2porous refers to the ability of the limestone to absorb water; 
permeability refers to the ability of the limestone to transmit 
or distribute the water. 

3 
The Floridian Aquifer is the principal source of fresh water for 

most of Florida. In some areas the aquifer is exposed at the 

surface, as it is in Payne's Praire, and in other areas it lies 

deep beneath the Hawthorne formation or the Pleistocene sands. 



f 
p 
p 
I 

i 



which is heaviest when the aquifer is at the surface, may 

4 
also occur through sinkholes (Haile's Sink). 

Depending on the depth of the Ocala formation beneath 

the surface, its occurrence imposes two primary limiting 

factors on development. First, pollutants associated with urban 

5 
runoff may degrade the water quality of the aquifer. It 

should be pointed out, however, that the pollution potential 

will usually diminish with the thickness of overburden* 

6 
overlying the aquifer. Secondly, occurrence of the Ocala 

formation near or at the surface poses development problems 

insofar as excavation for utility lines and foundations are 

concerned. 

The importance of protecting the aquifer from pollution 

for residents of Metropolitan Gainesville, as well as residents 

outside the area, cannot be stressed enough. The Geology map 

(Fig. 2) will enable the reader to obtain a quick first 

approximation of the area distribution of the various geologic 

formations . 



^If the Hawthorne formation overlies the Ocala formation and the 
Hawthorne exhibits the heavy clay characteristic, little water 
may reach the Ocala since clay is a poor water transmitter. The 
water could, in this case, either evaporate or flow to a sinkhole 
or place where the Hawthorne is more permeable. 

^Pollutants derived from urban areas are discussed more fully in 
the chapter entitled, "Lake Trophic Levels." 

Soils and geologic formations filter some or all of the pollutants 
if they are thick enough. Adequate thickness varies with overlying 
formation and soil type. Individual cases must, therefore, be 
examined on their own merits. 



r 



F 



J 




te 



r^i 








in 



CD K S 



c0 5 i 

C9 £ 



)U9Uld0|3A3Q0i 

()!*i)!suas 
lu|SeaJ3U| 



4> a. 
c >> s 

4, C o 

§J« 

^ % — 

5 1™ 



Methodology 

The Geology map is essentially the same as that which 

7 
appeared in the Physiographic Survey of 1967. This map was 

selected after it was determined that, at that present time, 

it was most representative of existing conditions. 

The map shows the distribution of geologic formations 
assuming that all surface materials (such as soil) have been 
removed . 

Sensitivities were assigned to the various formations and 
the appropriate codes assigned. The Pleistocene Sands are 
considered least sensitive, the Hawthorne formation intermediate 
and the Ocala formation most sensitive. Reasons for the different 
sensitivities are based on the characteristics of each formation 
as discussed in the preceding section. 

It is strongly recommended that, before any type of 
development is proposed for a site, the developer become aware of 
the geologic characteristic of that site. This could be 
accomplished by taking core samples of the substrate. ° 



7 
Department of Community Development, Physiographic Survey 

(Gainesville: 1967) . 

g 

There are also scattered core samples available, the properties 
of which have been recorded and are considered to be public 
information. Located at the Bureau of Geology, Gunter Building, 
Tallahassee, Florida. 



11 



r'l 



i 



The importance of geologic awareness increases with the scale 
of development. The negative effects of development over 
inappropriate subsurface conditions oftentimes transcend 
the development site boundaries. 



12 



References 



Bartelli, L. J. et al.. Soil Surveys and Land Use planning ^ 
1966. 
A "how to" publication with regard to use of soil surveys. 

Cason , James, "Lake Alice - A Study of Potential Pollution of 
the Floridian Aquifer," in the Compass, vol. 47, no. 4, 
May, 1970. 

Clark, W. , Musgrove, R. et al.. Water Resources of Alachua, 
Bradford, Clay, and Union Counties Florida , 19 74. 
A technical report primarily concerned with the geohydrology 
of several counties. Of special interest is the geologic 
description of the area (pp. 9-30) and the section on 
groundwater (pp. 102-131) . 

Eschman, Donald and Marcus, Melvin, "The Geologic and Topo- 
graphic Setting of Cities," in Detwyler, Thomas, Marcus, 
Melvin, et.al. Urbanization and Environment . 1972, pp. 
27-50. 

A historical overview of the effects of geology on the form 
cities sometimes take. 

Flawn, Peter, Environmental Geology , 1970. 

Hyde, Luthor, "Principal Aquifers in Florida," 1965. 

A map delineating the various aquifers within the state. 
An accompanying text provides a concise description of the 
properties of each aquifer system. 

Leggett, Robert, Cities and Geology , 1973. 

A major work with many illustrations of the relationships, 
conflicts and solutions to geologic phenomena as it relates 
to urbanized and urbanizing areas. It is geared toward 
civil engineers, geologists, planners and public officials. 

McGauheay, P., "Manmade Contamination Hazards to Ground Water," in 
Detwyler, T. ed. , Man's Impact on Environment , 1971, pp. 
225-232. 

A discussion of the negative effects of urban derived 
pollutants on water tables and aquifers. 

McHarg, Ian, Design with Nature , 1971. 

A basic environmental planning text which describes map 
overlay techniques similar to the approach used in this study, 



13 



North Central Florida Regional Planning Council, "Water and 
Sewer Development Plan," 1973. 

A study focusing on Alachua County with much useful 
information with regard to geology and hydrology. Plate 
2-6 contains four geological cross sections two of which 
are across the HUD line. 

Pirkle, E. C, "Notes on Physiographic Features of Alachua County, 
Florida," 1956, Academy of Sciences Quarterly Journal, v. 
19, pp. 168-182. 

Planning Division, Department of Community Development, 
Physiographic Survey , 1967. 

The geology map from this publication was revised and is used 
in this study. 

U. S. Geological Survey, "A primer in ground water," 1966. 

A general discussion of aquifer, gound water, recharge 
areas etc., pp. 1-16. 

White, W. , The Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula , 1970. 
A technical report focusing specifically on the geologic 
history of Florida with the exception of the Panhandle area. 



14 



Chapter II 
Soils 



The identification and mapping of the different soil types 
or soil groups is one of the primary steps in land use planning 
and the determination of environmentally sensitive areas. 
The characteristics of the various soils, in large measure, 
should determine what the appropriate land use ought to be. 
The various soils have characteristics which differentiate one 
from another. However, some soils have similar properties that 
are alike; and in this case, soils are usually mapped together 
as a group or an association. This approach is generally less 
cumbersome than mapping individual soils. 

soils surveys were originally compiled to aid the farmer in 
selecting the best land for different agricultural purposes, 
but their usefulness has been extended to other areas such as 
the planning profession. Planners use soils data in recommending 
development patterns consistent with minimizing losses to 
individual property owners and businesses such as deterioration 
of streets, flooded homes, cracked walls and foundations, 
contamination of ground water, land sliding and so forth. The 
object, then, is to fit the appropriate land use to the appropriate 

soil. 

some soil characteristics that should be considered at the 

preliminary planning stage of development include drainage*, 

depth to limestone*, soil consistency*, shr ink-swell potential. 



15 



1 * ..y^A eionf^ ■'' These characteristics, 
trafflcability*, bearing value* and slope. 

in some cases, impose limitations to development. Early 

recognition of these problem areas may lead to an -amenable 

solution. 

Methodology 

There are approximately thirty individual soil types 
occurring in the Metropolitan Gainesville area. Soils with 
similar properties were grouped and ranked according to their 
suitability (sensitivity) for development. Generalized 
characteristics of these groups are summarized below. 

C^^^p 1 . best suited for development; limitations are 

localized when they occur. 

Group 2 - limestone occurrence at a relatively shallow 

depth beneath this soil may present an entry point for 

pollutants to the aquifer, as well as impose excavation 

difficulties. 

Group 3 - slow water percolation and this soils' 
occurrence with a fluctuating water table would indicate 
that due care must be observed in selecting the type and 
scale of development in these areas. 



^Slope is the subject of an entire chapter. 

2oue to the generalizing necessary when grouping is attempte^ 
localized limitation may exist. In all cases in 
tspections would be encouraged. 



ms 



16 



Group 4 - high shrink-swell potential and poor drainage signi- 
ficantly limit development suitability to the point that 
restricted recreational use might be most appropriate. 
Group 5 - low bearing value (due to organics) , very poor 
drainage and poor traf f icability preclude most land uses. 
Group 6 - these soils border waterways, are periodically flo- 
oded and are suited for recreational and open space uses only. 
A summary table of the soil groups and their limitations is 

presented below. 

Table 1 
Summary of Soil Suitability for Urban Uses by Group 
Residential 



Group 



Septic 



good 



very 
poor 



poor 



Sewer 



good 



fair- 
good 



Commercial/ 
Industrial 



good 



fair 



Transpor- 
tation 



good 



fair 



very 
poor 



poor 



fair 



fair- 
good 



Recreation 



Intensive 



good 



good 



fair 



Extensive 



good 



Limitations 



slope, 
drainage 



good 



fair 



very 
poor 



very 
poor 



poor 



poor 



poor 



poor 



poor 



good 



limestone 



fair 



poor 



poor- 
fair 



drainage, 
traf f icabi- 
lity & bear- 
ing value 



extreme wet- 
ness, shrink- 
swell, traf- 
ficability & 
bearing value 



drainage, 
traf f icabi- 
lity, topo- 
graphy 



source: After Table 2, Physiographic Survey, Department of 
Community Development, Gainesville, i^b/. 



17 



The Soil map (Fig. 3) shown in this chapter, with the 
exception of some minor alterations is the same as the 
"Soil Suitability" map which appeared in the Physiographic 
Survey. The decision to use this map was based on an 
evaluation of its accuracy by comparing the groupings in the 
Physiographic Survey with basic soils information in the original 

text and map of soils completed originally by the U. S. 

3 
Department of Agriculture. The two maps compared favorably; 

and, in the absence of more recent soils information, the Soil 

Suitability map was adapted to this study and coded accordingly. 



3 
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil map (with text), soils 

surveyed 1937-40. 

18 




■am 



ttinq«J!nSMOS 
•^ CM CO «*■ u^ CO 

a. a. a. a. a. a. 

3 3 3 3 3a 

e o o e o o 

C9 C9 U C5 C5 U 



oa " ool OO 



References 



Department of Community Development, Physiographic Survey, 
1967. 

A plethora of information with regard to soils, focusing 
on Metropolitan Gainesville. 

Detwyler, T. et al.. Urbanization and Environment , 1972. 
Soils and associated problems in an urban setting. 

Division of State Planning, "The Florida General Soils Atlas," 
1974. 

A soils atlas reflecting the new names assigned to soils 
throughout the state. Soil potential has been broken down 
by numerous potential uses. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Guidelines for Erosion and 
Sediment Control Planning and Implementation , 1972. 
Technical publication offering a large array of approaches 
to deal with erosion/sedimentation problems. 

Flawn, P., Environmental Geology , 1970. 

Extensive discussion with regard to the engineering 
properties of soils. 

Leggett, R. Cities and Geology , 1973. 

Discussion of numerous aspects of soils. 

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Housing , 1973. 
The soils section of this study (pp. 94-101) contains 
a good general discussion of soils including soil qualities 
and their influence on the development. 

U. S. Department of Agriculture, "Soil Map" (with text), 1940. 



20 



Chapter III 
Slope 

Slope may be defined as the change in land elevation over 

horizontal distance, and it is usually expressed as a percentage 

( change in elevation = % slope) . Ordinarily, the rule of thumb 

distance 
with regard to slope is that the greater the slope, the more 

difficult (costly) it is to develop a site. There are some 

areas in Metropolitan Gainesville that are an exception 

to this rule. In these areas slope is only 0-1% which would 

seem to impose little, if any, restriction to development. 

Further investigation, however, would likely reveal that the 

soils in some of the 0-1% slope areas are generally 

impermeable. When soil impermeability is coupled with gentle 

slope, a common result is standing water after heavy rains. 

There are potential development problems at the other end 

of the scale in steeply sloping areas. In addition to the 

economic cost of developing a site characterized by steep 

slopes, there may be envii onmental impact implications as well. 

For example, alteration of a slope in order to accommodate 

development could lead to increased runoff and large-scale 

erosion and subsequent sedimentation onto adjacent property or 

nearby water bodies. Furthermore, sedimentation of water bodies 

has a very wide spectrum of environmental difficulties associated 

with it. There are methods of minimizing erosion, sedimentation 



21 



and runoff if a steep slope is to be developed. Some of these 
methods are discussed in Appendix 1. 

Slope may have an effect on the microclimate 'of an area. 
According to the North Central Florida Regional Planning Council's 

publication. Housing : 

"in the Northern Hemisphere, south slopes will be warmer 
than flat land because they ^iH -cexve more dxrect 

resultinq in temperatures that are 10 to 15 F coiaer 
than sirLunding^reas. Landforms -^^ f ^°,f ^^j;|^;i, 
redirect, and intensify prevailing winds. ^^^^^^^^^' 
^rt Vnr4ferable to locate residential areas on south 
or s^u^h^f Spacing slopes. East f^pes are superior 
to west slopes to take advantage of the rising sun ana 
avoid the direct rays of the hot afternoon sun And 
it is better to keep structures up on any slope than in 
the bottom of a valley to take advantage of prevailing 
winds. " 

in view of the current energy shortages, location of 
structures in such a way as to maximize or minimize the effects 
of winds and temperatures will probably become more important 

with the passage of time. 

While most difficulties with regard to slope are technically 
solvable, recognition of problem areas erior to development, 
rather than the attempt to solve problems after development is 
completed, affords a distinct advantage. Table 2 exhibits various 
land uses, slopes and limitations which may occur due to their 
interaction. 



22 



Methodology 

The Slope map (Fig. 4) was prepared utilizing U. S. 
Geological Survey topographic maps. Spacing of the contour 
lines on these maps was used to determine the various slopes in 
Metropolitan Gainesville. 

Four slope categories have been differentiated; 0-1%, 0-5%, 
6-12% and 12+%. The 0-1% category contains areas characterized 
by impermeable soils. Included in the category 0-5% are those 
areas 0-1% without impermeable soils. 

Least sensitive of the categories are the 0-5% slopes. 
Higher in sensitivity are the 6-12% slopes. Finally, 0-1% 
and 12+% slopes are the most sensitive and are considered to 
be equivalent because they each have inherent drainage problems. 



23 



^ 



ll 














































































<u 














































































bl 


3 












































































CO 














































































•H 
















H 










H: 










^ 










> 


< 
























CO 














































































>-i 














































































Q 














































































> 


^ 












































































4J 














































































•H 














































































(U rH 














































































hicl 
sibi 




















































































X 


X 


X 












> 


1 




















>< 












•X 






X 


X 


• 


(U CO 












































































CO 


> <u 












































































r«. 


o 












































































o> 


o 












































































r-i 


< 










































































• 
























—^ 






















































- C 


#V 












































































o 


>. 


CN 










































































•H 


iH 


0) 










































































U 


3 


a 










































































O 


i-j 


>. 










































































•H 




H 










































































4-1 


00 


4-1 










































































CO 


C 


V. c 










































































CU 


•H 


OJ (U 










































































M 


W 


±1 E 

•H 0) 




X 


x: 


X 


X 


X 








ix 


>< 


X 




















Jx 








X 




xl X 


xi 


X 






XJ XJ rH 


3 
O 


s > 










































































to 


33 


•H o 










































































CJ 




1-1 ^ 










































































•H 


C 


a 










































































(0 


O 


B 










































































t^ 




M 










































































-So 


>^ 


Vj C 










































































- a^ 

4J OJ 


13 

3 

4J 


0) o 










































































CO ^ 


C/2 


•U -H 










































































CO , 




to -U 










































































(U ^ 


rH 


:s CO 










































































--<v^ 


•H 


73 -H 
















X 












X 












X 


































CO 




<U i-H 










































































o ^. 


3 


0) <U 










































































^ 4-1 


o 


^ g 










































































4-) "^ 


U 


>. CO 










































































CO 


bO 


CO ^ 










































































o, " 


p! 


X u 










































































•^ C30 


•H 


X) M 










































































- to c 


CO 


(U C 










































































c 'j 


iH 


(U -H 










































































o •:^ 


Oh 


CO 




















X 




X 








X 


X 


X 






































^-S 


rH 


>. u 












































































CO 
(3 


CO M 










































































to '^-^ 


S <u 










































































T3 O 


O 


H 










































































g OJ 


•H 
ftO 
CU 

PCJ 


rH 






























































1 










■■ 1 


2 N 

'^ -H 


M 










































































<+H W 


•H 












































X 


X 




























o .. 


CO 
•T3 


iJ 










































































&0 *:! 


•H 


3 
O 










































































5 I 


V4 

o 

rH 


CO 










































































- CO ^ 


rH 


1 -u 

<U -H 












































































CO 
4J 


.H e 










































































(U i> 


•U -H 

•H 
hJ O 




X 














X 












X 












X 












X 












X 








4-1 


<u 










































































MH 

o o 


u 


i5 










































































4-1 
- 0) 
to rH 
1-4 CO 

CU o 
U-i CO 


Xi 


(0 

C 
0) 

a 
w 










































































o 

53 












X 










X 


X 










X 


X 




X 








X 




X 






















CU 
>-i o 


M 










































































4-1 

60 


4J 












































































C CO 
-•ri U 


< 






















'~'~~ 




















































"~" 














































































4J CU 




o 

CO 










^s 


^s 










6^9 


5^ 










5^8 


5^ 










5^ 


5^ 










s-« 


^9 










^S 


^s 


3 MH 

o CU 


<u 




B^ 


}^ 


^s 


CN 


+ 




rH 


f-S 


^s 


CM 


+ 




^s 


5^ 


^S 


CN 


+ 




^s 


3-S 


3vS 


CN 


+ 




^s 


^S 


5^ 


CN 






^s 


>s 


5^S 


CN 




(^ (^ 


CJ 




r-\ 


■^ 


LO 


T-\ 




■n 


m 


rH 




rH 


PO 


m 


rH 




iH 


ro 


in 


rH 




rH 


m 


m 


r-l 


+ 




r-i 


cn 


m 


r-i 


+ 




u 




1 


1 


1 


1 


:s 




1 


1 


1 


1 


CN 




1 


1 


1 


1 


rsi 




r 


1 


1 


1 


CN 




1 


1 


1 


1 


CN 




1 


1 


1 


1 


M 




3 




o 


iH 


m 


^Ml 




O^, 


-o 


Li-1 


r-i 




o 

1 


iH 


-" 


^^ 




o 


H 


■n 


m 


rH 




° 


r-t fO 


LO rH 


■ 


o 


r-i 


men 


-* 


r-i CN 


O 










— 1 




(U 


— 1 1 — 1—1 — 


iH 
CO CU 


>, 


0) 


(U 

u 




o 

•rl 


3 

4.1 








•H CO 


M 


u 


c 




4J 


rH 








4-1 3 


4-1 


^ 


(U 




CO 


3 








C 


CO 


<u 


"O 


(0 


0) 


o 








CU 'O 


3 


B 


•H 


T3 


u 


•H 








•W C 


X) 


E 


cn 


cd 


o 


).l 








P '^ 


C 


o 


(U 


o 


0) 


hn 








pL. »-l 


M 












Ul 












Kil 












yi\ 












ocS 












<\ 










1 







References 



Bureau of Economic Geology, (University of Texas) , Approaches to 
Environmental Geology , 1974. 

A collection of papers primarily concerned with geology but 
including many references to slope. 

The Department of Environmental Services, "Erosion, Runoff and 
Sedimentation Ordinance (No. 73-10 as amended by No. 73-57 
for Leon County, Florida)," 1974. 

A quick overview of a sediment ordinance along with 
suggested alternatives of compliance. 

, "Environmental 

criteria for erosion, runoff and sedimentation control," 

1974. 

A report written for the citizen and/or developer explaining 

in words, as well as with graphics the problems associated 

with alteration of land contour and methods of minimizing 

associated effects. 



Environmental Protection Agency, Guidelines for Erosion and 
Sediment Control Planning and Implementation , 1972. 

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Housing , 1973. 
See "Slope use zoning," pp. 81-84. 

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 
"Controlling erosion on construction sites," 1970. 

, "Better communities through 



resource planning," 197 2, Unger, D. G. , "A new look at 
sediment control." 

, "Soil erosion, the work of 



uncontrolled water," Agriculture Bull. 260, 1971. 

U. S. Geological Survey, Topographic map Gainesville, East, 1966. 

, Orange Heights. 

, Rochelle. 

, Micanopy. 

, Airedondo. 

__^ , Gainesville, West. 



26 



Chapter IV 
Wetlands 

For purposes of this study a wetland is defined as an 
area such as a lake, swamp or physiographic depression which 
contains water either perennially or intermittantly . 

In recent years, the importance and value of coastal and 
inland wetlands has been brought into clearer focus at the state 
and national levels. This new awareness is manifest by the 
establishment of environmentally oriented governmental 
organizations together with new laws and legislation, the purpose 
of which is to cope with some of the problems associated with 
wetlands . 

Whether a wetland is a lake, submerged marsh, intermittantly 
submerged marsh or depression, it serves numerous natural functions 
If the wetland were to be destroyed, it would cost man a 
substantial amount to duplicate its various functions, if he could 
duplicate them at all. 

The following is a brief listing of some of the functions 
that the various types of wetlands provide. In many instances, 
wetlands : 

1. bear the brunt of flooding activity and act as retention 
ponds in the aftermath, thereby reducing costs associated 
with floods; 

2. act as chemical/mechanical filters of pollutants from 
urban runoff; 



27 



3. act as habitat for aquatic and terrestrial wildlife and 
associated vegetation; 

4. are aquifer recharge areas; 

5. moderate climate; 

6. are important in the propagation of food supplies 
and water storage; and 

7. provide aesthetics and recreation. 

Wetlands evolve and degrade by internal and external 
forces. Lakes, for example, evolve from a pristine state and 
then pass through several stages, or trophic levels, to dry land 
or bogs. This evolutionary process, free of urban influence, 
usually takes several thousand years. Man's influence oftentimes 
accelerates the aging process of wetlands to the order of decades 
instead of centuries.-'- Some of the primary sources or activities 
which hasten the demise of wetlands, thereby forfeiting their 
benefits, include: 

1. sediment from alteration of landform; 

2. overtaxation of the pollutant assimilation capability 
of the wetland by the introduction of an excessive 
volume of urban runoff; ^ 

3. filling or "reclaiming" wetlands, which removes storage 
capacity for flood water and may "kill" the wetland 
biologically; 



Trophic levels of lakes in Metropolitan Gainesville are discussed 
and graphically represented in the chapter entitled "Lake Trophic 
Levels. " 

2 

Urban runoff oftentimes contains greater strength and diversity 

of pollutants than raw sewage. 



28 



4. reduction of flow of fresh water into the wetland, thereby 
greatly lowering its ability to flush itself clean of 
pollutants; 

5. locating structures around the periphery of the wetland, 
thereby subjecting it to runoff from structures themselves, 
fertilizers on the lawns and pesticides in the gardens; 

6. dredging in some instances. 

The examples above are but few of the means of greatly 
impairing the effectiveness of or destroying a wetland altogether. 
Fortunately, however, none of these adverse effects need occur 
when citizens are aware of the possible consequences of certain 
activities. 

The Wetlands map (Fig. 5) delineates the wetlands by type 
in metropolitan Gainesville. 

Methodology 

The wetlands in the study area were delineated using the 
latest available United States Geological Survey (USGS) 
topographic maps. Boundaries were traced utilizing the wetland 
symbols on the map, as well as the peripheral ground elevations. 
USGS maps distinguish three types of wetlands; lakes, permanently 
wet marshes and intermittantly wet marshes or depressions. The 
boundaries drawn were then checked against the most recent aerial 
photographs and corrections were made as needed. 



3 

Dredging can save or destroy a wetland. In order to determine 

the likely result, an intensive hydrogeological , biological and 
chemical analysis should be prerequisite. 




DQI 



The various categories and sensitivity rankings are as 
follows : 

Perennially Wet Marshes and Lakes Most Sensitive 

Intermittantly Wet Marshes 

Permanently Dry Land Least Sensitive 

Perennially Wet Marshes and Lakes are ranked as equivalents 
since they are both continuously wet and support distinctive 
fauna and flora. Intermittantly Wet Marshes were ranked next 
since their containment of water is occasional and vegetation, 
aquatic and terrestrial life forms are less dependent on them 
than in the case of a permanently wet area. This is not meant 
to diminish their importance as storm water overflow containers. 
Permanently Dry Land is, of course, least sensitive. 

The chapter on Lake Trophic levels explains the water quality 
of some of the wetlands and will thereby provide an additional 
parameter with regard to evaluating wetlands. 



31 



References 



Detwyler, Thomas, ed. , Man's Impact on Environment, 1971, 
Bylinsky, G., "The limited war on water pollution," 
pp. 195-204. 



, Leopold, L. , "The hydrologic effects of 



urban land use," pp. 205-216. 
_, Cole, L., "Thermal pollutions," pp. 217-224. 



, McGauhey, P., "Manmade contamination hazards 



to ground water," pp. 225-232 



32 



Chapter V 
Lake Trophic Levels 



Lakes undergo a natural aging process known as eutrophioa- 
tion. in the beginning of this process, a lake is oftentimes in 
a pristine state. The end of the process is usually characterised 
by the invasion of terrestrial vegetation and the evolution of the 
lake to marginal land (bog, swamp). The trophic level of a lake 
refers to the water quality and stage of evolution of the lake.^ 
The eutrophication or aging is caused by nutrient enrichment of 
the water. These nutrients may be naturally occurring, such as 
decomposing vegetation or aquatic life, or could be a by-product 
of urbanization such as ruuoff from buildings, streets and lawns. 

While eutrophication is a natural process, it is greatly 
accelerated by development in proximity to water bodies. Fertili- 
zers, pesticides, sewage, increased runoff, impervious surfaces 
(streets, buildings, parking lots) and so on act as sediment to 
fill in the lake and also as nutrients which encourage the growth 
of water plants (hyacinths, weeds, etc.). These nutrients (ferti- 
lizers) require oxygen dissolved in the water to decompose. This 
reduces fish populations by depleting much of their needed oxygen 
supply. 



^Factors usually considered when determining the trophic level of a 
lake Include biological oxygen demand (B.O.D.)S chemical oxygen 
d^mLd (c!o.D.)*, water clarity, f -nal/f loral P°f ^^^^^ '.^^^i,,! 
level of sedimentation, color, turbidity*, and the overall cnemicax 
composition of the water. 



33 



Figure 6 shows the relationship of nutrients or fertilizers 
on the aging process of a hypothetical lake. Note the increase 
in plant growth as a result of the introduction of nutrients 
(dashed line) and the corresponding shortening of the life of the 
lake. 

Figure 6 



Ul (J 

*- < 

>- u. 

< DC 

S 3 

U 

I , — Ul 

o Z 

ae 

O u. 

u. O 

o< 

o < 



O a: 

o. a. 



/ 



Effects of Fertilizers 
Artificial or Domestic 



\ 




Extinction 



Nolurol E u Ir oph ic o t io n 



AGE OF THE LAKE 



Source: Revised after Putnam, et al., "Eutrophication 

Factors in North Central Florida Lakes" Engineering 
and Industrial Experiment Station, College of 
Engineering, University of Florida, 1969, p. 3. 

Lakes progress through several stages or trophic levels. 
There is little agreement, however, between authors on the defini- 
tions of each of these and even less agreement on quantitative 



34 



values. The following qualitative definitions have been selected 

for purposes of this study: 

Oligotrophia - low plant nutrient content and abundant dis- 
solved oxygen (D.O.) in the water; the water is usually clear 
and of good quality; the primary evolutionary state. 

Mesotrophic - increased nutrient levels with accompanying 
increased aquatic faunal activity. 

Eutrophic - increased nutrient level; deficiency in D.O.; 
greatly increased aquatic flora (weeds, algae, etc.) . 

Hypereutrophic - highest nutrient and flora levels; increas- 
ing amounts of sedimentation. 

Senescent - last stage of evolution before becoming terres- 
trial; low oxygen content; weed choked. 

Dystrophic - does not refer to trophic level but is rather an 
adjunct characteristic; refers to brownish water color as a 
result of humic content. 

Figure 7 is a representation of typical natural trophic succes- 
sion and lake extinction. Under urban influences the graph would 
be skewed to the left (shorter time periods) . 

Figure 7 



< 










u 








/^ ~~— 


< 









/ Climax 


Z 
3 


/^ Eulrophy 






/ 


Ul 


/ 






_J 


Z 

o 

u 

3 

a 
O 

ac 


/ 




y^ 


Bog Forest 


/ 




^—^^Maf 






y' Oligotrophy 


Sen e 


I e n c e 





TIME 



35 



Source: Revised after Putnam, et al., "Eutrophication 

Factors in North Central Florida Lakes , "Engineering 
and Industrial Experiment Station, -College of 
Engineering, University of Florida, 1969, p. 4. 

Appendix II contains an illustration which shows the complexity 
of the interrelationships affecting the metabolism of a lake. 

The importance of lakes and other wet areas are discussed in 
the chapter entitled "Wetlands." Lake trophic levels are important 
when considering priorities of which lakes are salvageable or in 
need of protection from urban influences. 

Methodology 

The Lake Trophic Level map (Figure 8) was derived primarily 
from a publication entitled "Eutrophication Factors in North Central 
Florida Lakes." The project was directed by H. D. Putnam through 
the facilities of the Florida Engineering and Industrial Experiment 
Station. In this study lakes above a minimal size within Alachua 
County were discussed with regard to their trophic levels. These 
lakes are summarized in the table below. 

Table 3 

Trophic Levels of Lakes in Metropolitan Gainesville 

Depth Area Trophic 
Name Location (in feet) (acres) Level^ 

1-Newnan's East of G'ville 6.0 6328.0 HE 

2-Trout Southeast of G'ville 4.5 37.0 E 



2 
O = Oligotrophic 

M = Mesotrophic 

E = Eutrophic 

HE = Hypereutrophic 

S = Senescent 



-^fi 



9.0 


4.4 


E 


4.5 


9.6 


M 


6.0 


172.9 


HE 


6.0 


91.4 


s3 


6.0 


10.6 


E 


6.0 


18.3 


M 


15.0 


13.3 


M 


Not Avail. 


5.4 


M 


3.0 


207.5 


S 



3-Unnamed South G'ville 

4-Meta Northwest G'ville 

5-Bivens Arm South G'ville 

6-Alice University of Florida 

7-Clear Southwest G'ville 

8-Unnamed West of G'ville 

9-Unnamed Northwest of G'ville 

10-Unnamed South of Preceding Lake 

11-Kanapaha Southwest of G'ville 

Source: Revised after Putnam, et al . , "Eutrophication 

Factors in North Central Florida Lakes ," Engineering 
and Industrial Experiment Station, College of 
Engineering, University of Florida, 1969, p. 68. 

The trophic level column in Table 3 was revised from the pre- 
viously cited publication. In some cases, the table presented in 
that publication gave a range of trophic levels; i.e., E-S. When 
this was the case, the more severe trophic level was assumed for 
purposes of this study. The reason for this was that since the 
original study took place six years ago and development has increased 

since that time, the more advanced trophic level was felt to be more 

4 
representative of currently existing conditions. 

The lakes in the study area fall into four of the five trophic 

level categories. These include mesotrophic, eutrophic, hypereutro- 

phic and senescent. Insofar as the assignment of sensitivity was 



Trophic level of Lake Alice might fluctuate somewhat since periodic 
hyacinth removal takes place. If left untreated, however, it would 
likely become permanently senescent. 

4 
Personal communication with Mr. Bill Hurst, County Pollution Control 

Officer, 12/10/74. 



37 



v, 



concerned, it was assumed that those lakes relatively pristine 
would be most sensitive. By way of example, a mesotrophic lake 
is in a relatively pristine state and as such, would be the most 
sensitive environmentally to change. A senescent lake is at its' 
terminal point in evolution. It would have little sensitivity 
insofar as change is concerned. Also taken into account when 
assigning sensitivity values was the relative ease or difficulty 
in reversing the eutrophication. 

The fact that a lake is senescent does not mean that it is 
useless. What it does mean is that it is at an advanced stage in 
its evolution and there are probably little, if any, fish in the 
lake. The lake could, however, be used for some recreational pur- 
poses, such as boating. Additionally, the lake does serve as a 
natural retention basin for runoff. The water and its location 
could support local species of wildlife, and for this reason alone 
it should be considered a valuable resource. 



39 



References 



Clark, W. E., Musgrove, R. H., et al., "Water Resources of 
Alachua, Bradford, Clay and Union Counties,"' 1964. 

Detwyler, Thomas, ed., Man's Impact on Environment , 1971., 
Beaton, A., "Eutrophication of the St. Lawrence Great 
Lakes," pp. 23 3-24 5. 

, Holm, L., Weldon, L., Blechburn, R. , "Aquatic 



Weeds," pp. 246-265. 

Hurst, W. T., "Report to Alachua County Pollution Control Board," 
1974. 

A study of Bivens Arm Lake to establish a data base upon 
which a more detailed program could be conducted and to 
catalog all sources of pollution entering the lake. To 
these ends, sampling stations were set up, the findings of 
which are included in the report. 

Putnam, H. D., Project Director , Brezonik, P., et al., "Eutro- 
phication Factors in North Central Florida Lakes," 1969. 
An in-depth discussion of eutrophication as a process, 
alternative schools of thought on the subject and the method 
of analysis used in determining lake trophic levels in this 
area of the State. 



40 



Chapter VI 
Flood-Prone Areas 

For purposes of this study, areas located within the 100 

year flood plain were considered to be flood prone. The 

Gainesville Flood Control Ordinance (No. 18 83) defines the 100 

year flood plain as: 

"That area adjacent to the flood channel district which 
is inundated as a result of the rainfall which occurs 
once in one hundred (100) years on the average based upon 
conditions existant at the time of passage of this Ordinance."^ 

Flood plain areas, if left undisturbed, serve several useful 
purposes to man, wildlife and other sectors of the overall 
ecosystem. They are oftentimes valuable as open space and buffer 
areas but their primary function is to act as an overflow area 
for storm water which has exceeded the capacity of the flood 
channel. When the flood channel has been breached, the water is 
contained and/or absorbed on the flood plains. When the storm 
which produced the excess water ceases, the water begins to 
disappear from the flood plain by percolation through the soil 
and evaporation. 

Runoff speed and volume will increase, most significantly, 
as a result of impermeable surfaces such as roofs, streets, parking 
lots, etc. The flood plain effectively limits the areal 



Actually a flood plain could also be defined as a 5, 10, 20, 
50 year flood plain. Two things distinguish one from the other: 
(1) the intensity of the rainfall, and (2) the area inundated as 
a result of the rainfall. In this study only 100 year flood 
plains are considered. 

^Code of Ordinances, City of Gainesville, Florida, Chapter 20, 
Sec. 30-2, Para b, p. 582. 

41 



distribution of excessive storm water. If a flood plain 
is filled to some extent for development or some other purpose, 
the storm water retention capacity will be reduced by the volume 
filled. This principle may be likened to a glass of water filled 
to the brim. If an object is inserted into the glass, a volume 
of water equal to the volume of the object will overflow the 
glass. In an urbanized situation, filling sometimes means 
that property that was once peripheral to the flood plain 
becomes part of the flood plain. 

Methodology 

The Flood-Prone Areas map (Fig. 9) was produced by 
combining the information found in three independent studies 
dealing with this subject. A study by Dr. B. A. Christensen 
(Professor, Civil Engineering Department, University of Florida) 
delineated the 100 year flood level along the Hogtown Creek 
Drainage Basin. The drainage study recently completed, under 
the auspices of the North Central Florida Regional Planning 
Council, mapped the 100 year flood line for most of 
the HUD area. Federal flood maps from the USGS were used to fill 
in areas not covered by the other previously mentioned 
studies . 

The individual studies used different map scales; therefore, 
each (except the USGS) map was adjusted to the base map scale of 
1" = 2000'. After all information was transferred to the base 
map, it was assumed that ' a certain amount of error would result 
since scales were reduced and information was transferred from one 
map to another. Therefore, a check was run to determine what the 



42 



maximum deviation might be. The test indicated that the boundary 
around any of the flood prone' areas could be off by +300 feet, or 
1/8 inch on the map. Because of this correction factor, it is 
recommended that borderline properties be evaluated by the 
individual maps at the Department of Community Development. 



•^The error factor of +3 00' pertains only to the map kept at 
Department of Community Development. The Flood Prone map in 
this chapter was reduced in size from the map cited above for 
publication purposes. 



44 



References 



Christensen, B. A., et al., "Identification and -Evaluation of 
Natural Detention Sites in Hogtown Creek Drainage Basin," 
1974. 

One of the information sources used to produce the flood 
prone map. Writing geared to the layman and engineer. 

Soil Conservation Service, "Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds/' 
1975. 

A technical report discussing runoff equations, their deri- 
vation and application. Chapters 1-4. 

Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc., (for North Central 

Florida Regional Planning Council), "1974 Drainage," 1974. 
A drainage plan with alternatives for the majority of the 
HUD area. 

U. S. Geological Survey, "Flood Prone Maps." 

, Leopold, L. and Langbein, W. , "A primer 



on Water," 1966; pp. 19-22. 



45 



Chapter VII 
Vegetation 

Much of the visual aesthetic quality of Metropolitan Gaines- 
ville is due to the fact that more than eighty percent of the 
area has tree cover or is in agricultural-type use. This per- 
centage of vegetation coverage is significantly higher than many 
other urbanized areas. 

Vegetation (including trees, shrubs, grasses, etc.) plays an 
important role in the overall ecosystem. Aside from its' intrin- 
sic or aesthetic appeal, it provides ancillary functions as well. 

In the wildlife sector vegetation provides shelter, food, pro- 
tection and migration ways, as well as a habitat for reproduction. 
The photosynthetic process of vegetation helps to maintain the 
oxygen/carbon dioxide balance, which is a function important to all 

living things. 

Especially important in urban areas is the characteristic of 
leaves to filter particulates and pollutants from the air. Vege- 
tation may serve as greenbelt buffering and helps to cool the air, 

2 

somewhat offsetting the effects of sun and paving. 

With regard to erosion, vegetation acts to hold soil together, 
and the root systems absorb water in times of heavy rainfall and 
flooding. 



^In order for an area to be classified as "tree covered," the site 
must have approximately 30% tree crown cover as determined from 
aerial photographs. 

2see Heat Absorption table in North Central Florida Regional Planning 
Council publication Housing , 1973, p. 87. 



46 



Some vegetative associations are unique to certain environ- 
ments and are characterized by such dependencies as perennial or 
intermittent wetness or dryness of the soil, soil a'cidity or 
alkalinity, soil mineral content, topography and slope to name 
a few. These unique associations are important intrinsically 
and because they sometimes support uncommon wildlife species. 

Table 4 indicates the various vegetation classifications 
mapped at the end of this section. 

Table 4 

Vegetation and Its Sensitivity to Change, 
Metropolitan Gainesville 



Lowest Sensitivity 



Highest Sensitivity 



Vegetation Type 

3 

Non-Forested/Urban 

Agricultural/Pasture 

Pineland 

Upland Hardwood 

Prairie 

Lowland Hardwood 



% Metro Area Acres 



15 
27 
38 
10 
5 
5 



12,900 

23,220 

32,600 

8,600 

4,300 

4,300 



Methodology 

The various types of vegetation were delineated from an aerial 
photograph mosaic.^ To the trained eye tones, shades, crown shapes 
and image distinctiveness on a photograph represents different vege- 
tation types. In order to secure the most accurate mapping of the 
various vegetation types and their distribution, an individual with 



•^Op. cit. , Footnote 1. 

^North Central Florida Regional Planning Council, "Aerial Photograph 
of Metropolitan Gainesville," (scale 1" = 1500'), January, 1971. 



47 



expertise in the area and a thorough knowledge of Metropolitan 
Gainesville was solicited. The map was drawn with some guiding 
parameters which included: 

1. areas with vegetation coverage of less than 30% are 
considered Non-Forested/Urban; 

2. within any vegetation category it was understood that 
the main type is mapped and that minor amounts of other 
species may be present; and 

3. pinelands include naturally occurring, as well as planted 
pines , 

Vegetation sensitivity was assigned taking two guidelines into 
account. First, the relative abundance of a given vegetation type 
was considered (see percentages in Table 4) . It was assumed that 
if a particular vegetation type was a small percentage of the total 
it would be more valuable than one which occupied a large percentag 
Generally, each type has an accompanying and somewhat unique wild- 
life community, as well as lesser associated vegetation. An appa- 
rent discrepancy arises if one looks at the percentages in the 
table and then at the ranking. Using percentages alone, the rank- 
ing would be different than that found in the table; more specifi- 
cally, the order of the first three vegetation types would be 
reversed. Such a ranking, however, would be unreasonable and myopii 



^Mike Bordyn, County Forester, essentially drew the vegetation map 
and worked with staff to assign sensitivity values for vegetation, 

°"Lesser" associated vegetation refers to ground cover found with 
a particular tree type. 



48 



considering the nature of these first three vegetation types. 
This approach to assigning sensitivity was, therefore, eliminated 
and instead Non-Forested/Urban was ranked least sensitive because 
by definition much of the vegetation has already been removed. 
Agricultural/Pasture was ranked less sensitive than Pinelands 

since agricultural land is usually monotypic because the land has 

7 
been cleared of indigenous vegetation to accommodate crops. Pine- 
lands then is the most sensitive of these three since natural pines 
in this category have an accompanying association of lesser vegeta- 
tion species; i.e., the pineland category is more diverse than the 
preceding categories. 

The second guideline used to assign sensitivity was the prin- 
ciple of natural succession. In terms of vegetation, natural 
succession is an evolutionary process whereby species composition 
changes with each new community being more advanced than the pre- 
ceding ones. The ranking of vegetation types in the preceding 
table is believed to be consistent with this process. 

In addition to the primary guidelines discussed above, some 
of the other considerations included such factors as sensitivity of 
the vegetation type to an urban environment, uniqueness and quality. 
Admittedly some of the ranking is based on subjective value judgment. 



7 
Monotypic usually means "one specie." In this case, since most indi- 
genous vegetation is removed to accommodate crops, the trees remain- 
ing would probably have their ground cover removed in the process of 
clearing, and other crop-preparatory measures. Therefore, little 
diversity of species would likely remain. 



49 



The Vegetation map (Figure 10) is a product of the pre- 
viously discussed parameters, guidelines and aerial photograph 
interpretations . 



50 



References 



Detwvler, T., ed. Ma n's Impact on Environment , 197-1. 

Curtis ; John, "The Modifica tion ot Mid-Latitude Grasslands 
and Forests by Man/' pp. 507-521. ^„^i„+.ion/ 

An historical perspective combining the natural evolution/ 
succession of vegetation and the effects brought on by man- 
made influences. 

Turk, A., et al.. Ecology, Po llution, Environment, 1972. 

See DP 17-19 for a brief but informative discussion of 
natural succession. Also see pp. 91-98 for a discussion 
of the effects of air pollution on vegetation. 

university of Florida, Agricultural Experiment Station, "General 
map of Natural Vegetation of Florida, June, 1967. 



52 



Chapter VIII 
Wildlife 

All living things depend on plants, animals or both for food 
to sustain them. This interdependency is commonly referred to as 

a food chain. In turn, the food chain is a linkage within the 

2 
overall ecosystem. Therefore, disruption or elimination of any 

of the levels in the food chain hierarchy will lead to spin-off 
effects in other sectors. These effects are not always catas- 
trophic, but it is important to recognize that they do indeed 
occur so that ameliorative measures can be taken. 

Man is the most adept species for altering his environment 
to suit his personal needs and wants. He is a species which 
encapsulates himself by building a home, regulating the tempera- 
ture within it, insulating it from outside noise and sealing it 
with a door to keep out would-be intruders. 

Wildlife, on the other hand, are limited in their efforts of 
encapsulation. If their present surroundings are acceptable for 
life functions, they will reside there. But, if the surroundings 
change (fire, natural alteration, man) , migration may become neces- 
sary. 

When man changes an environment, wildlife migration is some- 
times a side effect. The wildlife species which remain after the 



Food chains are discussed with graphic examples in Ecology, Pollu- 
tion, Environment , Turk, Turk and Wattes, Philadelphia: W. B. 
Saunders Co., 1972, pp. 3-12. 

2 

Ecosystems are discussed in the Preface. 



53 



f 

alteration are more adaptive than the ones that left and some 
tend to become a nuisance to man. 

In order to promote the co-existence of man and wildlife, 
due care should be taken to recognize wildlife habitats which 
are unique or which support a diverse wildlife community. If 
these areas can be preserved or disturbed minimally, then man 
and wildlife will benefit. Man will retain the intrinsic and 
aesthetic benefits of a diverse wildlife community and their 
accompanying habitats. The wildlife will benefit because most 
of them will have no need to migrate and will thereby continue 
their life cycle relatively undisturbed. 

Gainesville and its surrounding environs have certain areas 
which are valuable wildlife habitats (see Wildlife Map) . The 
quality of these areas are coded appropriately on the Wildlife 
map, from Highest to Lowest sensitivity. 

Methodology 

The Wildlife Suitability map (Figure 11) is a combination of 
soils, vegetation and land use information. 

Soils were evaluated as to their ability to support diverse 

vegetation types which would supply various wildlife with neces- 

3 
sary habitat. The various soils were then mapped, as was the 



3 
The basic information used to determine the relative value of soils 

in relation to production of vegetation, was derived from the table 
on pages 5 and 6 in The Florida General Soils Atlas, with Interpre- 
tations , Division of State Planning, July, 1974. This source of 
soils information was selected for use in the wildlife section instead 
of the Soils map in Chapter II of this report because Chapter II did 
not consider wildlife, while the map from the Division of State 
Planning did. 



54 








f^-:/: 



^^8w^^ ^^&^^9k./^^^^^^ 







r 





o 




O 



^ 



,»S MIEI MS 




wmk 



-*^ 



' i i''Vr >» V * ''tVI'/ i '' i YrM'Vf' i V i ''V i 'rt'r'M'ri» i 'T' wi ' i f«'fn 












^0 «s 



«•■>' LU _j 



</> 



«0 E 

e 
u 



^iMPI'M-XH 
<;!l!qc)lns 
luiseaj3U| 



vegetation and land use elements, in accordance with a devised 
numerical rating scheme. This numerical approach is exhibited 
in Appendix III of this report. Included in the mapping were soils 
suited for openland, woodland and wetland wildlife. 

Next, vegetation was evaluated using the Vegetation map 
(Chapter VII) . The types were rated Most-Least suitable with 
regard to their ability to provide all necessary wildlife habitat 
functions . 

The last element to be mapped was Land Use (Chapter IX) . It 
was assumed that, even though an area might be well suited in terms 
of soils and vegetation, land use would in many cases cancel this 
suitability. For example, the University of Florida is suitable 
from the vegetation and soil aspects; however, intensity of land 
use precludes diverse wildlife species from residing there. 

Finally, these three elements were combined to form a compo- 
site and a fourth map, the Wildlife Suitability map, resulted. 
Each of the previously discussed maps were carefully weighted in 
order to give the most realistic display. The Wildlife map has 
been examined and evaluated for omissions by experts in the field 
of wildlife and was found to be a reasonable representation of a 
given area's suitability to support wildlife. 

The wildlife specie types considered in this report included 
members of the reptile/amphibian, bird and mammal groups. A few 



^The experts included Steve Nesbitt and other staff members of the 
Florida Game and Fish Commission. 



56 



r 



L 



\- 



of these are considered to be "threatened" species and, therefore, 

5 
warrant special consideration. 

There is one known Florida Eagle nest located in the HUD area. 
Although eagles are not extremely rare, they do have nesting habits 
which are sensitive. Unlike most birds, eagles will use the same 
nest year after year. Therefore, destruction of the nest could 
lead to the destruction of the eagle. The eagle then is not threat- 
ened by its numbers but rather by its nesting habitats. Herons are not 
especially uncommon either, but Bivens Arm provides a breeding 

environment which is uncommon. 

Finally, the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker is a type of bird which 
will nest only in a mature, longleaf pine tree afflicted 
with a heart disease. This woodpecker is environment specific, 
which means it requires a very special nesting site without which 
it will probably perish. 

A complete list of all known wildlife species in Alachua County 
is available for inspection at the Department of Community Develop- 
ment. The list includes between 300 and 400 separate species, a 
great number of which are encountered in the HUD area. 

It should be pointed out that different species require areas 
of varying size. It was not feasible to include this element in 
this report because in order to have done so, it would have become 
necessary to map each species on an individual map. Although area 



5 
Reprint from. Florida Wildlife, "Threatened Species of Florida 

Wildlife," May, 1974. 



57 



requirements are important, staff believes that the approach 
used (soils, vegetation and land use) will serve the purposes 
of this report. 



58 



References 



Detwyler, T. , Man's Impact on Environment ^ 1971 / 

Fisher, J., "Wildlife in Danger," pp. 625-635. 

Highsmith, R. , Jensen, J., et al . , Conservation in the U. S. , 
1963. 

Meshenberg, M. , Environmental Planning: 1, Environmental 

Information for Policy Formulation , American Society of 
Planning Officials, Planning Advisory Service, 1970, 
pp. 22, 44. 

Wildlife Management Class, Oklahoma State University, The 

Role of Wildlife in the Stillwater Creek Greenbelt, 1973 



59 



Chapter IX 
Land Use 

The formulation of a land use plan is the end-product of 
evaluation of a myriad of data. Some of the information used in 
formulation of the Gainesville Urban Area Land Use Plan included: 

1. public attitudes concerning the desired character the 
community will take; 

2. economic base studies; 

3. physiographic information; 

4. cost/revenue studies of land use; 

5. population and employment studies; 

6. community facilities and recreation; 

7. transportation studies; 

8. industrial and land use studies. 

In addition to the main topics in the studies listed above, 
contained in most of them are many sub-elements. These data were 
evaluated individually and then in concert to arrive at the final 
product; i.e., the Land Use Plan. The general categories depicted 
on the land use map include residential, commercial, industrial, 
institutional, recreational, community facilities and proposed 



Part of the Land Use Plan is in map form delineating the various 
land use categories and intensities by employing various color 
schemes. The text portion of the Land Use Plan discussed com- 
munity objectives, consolidated the information of the various 
studies and is in general, an exhibit of the reasoning used to 
generate the land use map. 



60 



thoroughfare extensions. Some of these general categories are 
broken down further by density differences and some are combined 
in mixed-use categories. It should be noted that the map desig- 
nates proposed future land use. 

The "Existing Land Use" map should, over time, become con- 
sistent with the "Land Use Plan" in order to propagate the goals 
set forth. Existing land use is a limiting factor when environ- 
mentally sensitive areas are to be determined. For example, an 
area may be environmentally sensitive due to its physical charac- 
teristics; but if the area is already heavily urbanized, its envi- 
ronmental importance will be greatly diminished or eliminated. It 
was necessary, therefore, to balance physical elements which con- 
tributed to an area's environmental sensitivity with current land 
use so that a realistic determination could be made of which areas 
remain in a relatively natural state. 

Methodology 

The Land Use map (Figure 12) is a composite and generaliza- 
tion of the "Existing Land Use" map, and the "Wetlands" and "Vege- 
tation" maps from this study. Three broad land use categories 
were determined and sensitivities assigned as follows: 
Most Sensitive Undeveloped, Vacant, Woodland, Marshes (from 

Wetlands map) 

Agriculture, Pasture, Commercial Forestry (from 

Vegetation map) 
Least Sensitive Urban/Developed, Institutional ("Existing Land 

Use" map) 



61 



The first land use category was considered most sensitive 
since its characteristics impose the least threat to an environ- 
mentally sensitive area. Category two represents a somewhat 
altered environment which could impinge upon sensitive peripheral 
areas. The last category is least sensitive since, as previously 
discussed, the area is already essentially committed and/or 

urbanized. 

Land use has the greatest single effect on the integrity and 
maintenance of the environmentally sensitive areas in Metropolitan 
Gainesville. 



63 



References 



Department of Community Development, Commercial Study , 1969. 

, Community Facilities and Recreation , 
1968. 

, Economic Study, 1969. 



__, Enrollment and Employment, University 

of Florida and Santa Fe Junior College , 1967. 

, Industrial Study , 1969. 

, Land Use Analysis , 1969. 

, Land Use Plan, Gainesville Urban Area, 



1970. 

, Physiographic Study , 1967. 

^ , Planning Unit Study , 1968. 

, Population Study, 1968. 



Goodman, W. and Freund, E., eds.. Principles and Prac tice of Urban 
Planning, 1968, pp. 106-136. 



64 



Chapter X 
Environmentally Sensitive Areas 

None of the areas determined to be environmentally 
sensitive were found to be so on the basis of one element. 
These areas were synergistically determined in an effort 
to afford the greatest simulation of natural interaction. 

The Environmentally Sensitive Areas map (Figure 13 ) 
is the result of evaluating all the previous individual elements 
maps simultaneously. The map shows four priority or sensitivity 
classifications. The darkest areas are the most sensitive and 
the white areas are least sensitive of the four. These white 

areas, however, have a wider range of numerical values and should 

2 
not be considered to be of little or no sensitivity. Instead, 

white areas, or any other area, may be evaluated by using the 

numerical evaluation method described in Appendix IV. 

Methodology 

A detailed description of the methodology used to determine 
the environmentally sensitive areas may be found in Appendix IV. 
Due to its length and complexity, a greatly summarized version 
is presented below. 

Determination of the environmentally sensitive areas involved 
two approaches; visual and numerical. This combined method was 
selected as a check and to minimize the potential error which could 
result during the interpretation stage. 



-'• Synergism refers to the cooperative action of all the elements in 
the preceding chapters. The result is a total effect which is 
greater than the sum of the individual elements. 

2 

See Appendix IV. 

65 




1 

« 

1 

I 
I 

1 



4 



i 



! 



visual Step 

The individual element maps were overlayed and a composite 
map (Figure 14) emerged. From the composite, staff members 
individually delineated the darkest areas and assigned values to 
them depending on their degree of darkness. After this was 
completed, it was found that there was a great deal of 
similarity in the area designations. There were, however some 
differences of opinion of the degree of darkness or sensitivity. 
In order to reconcile these differences, a numerical rating system 
described below was also used. 
Numerical Step 

Three test sites for each value assigned in the visual step 
were selected from each map. Values for each of these were 
determined using Table 8 in Appendix IV. Conflict areas were 
then numerically analyzed and assigned to their appropriate 
priority groups. 

Some ninety conflict areas were evaluated in the manner 
described above. These were catalogued and indexed and are 
available for inspection at the Department of Community Development. 



67 






i Tr TT 
Ms Ui\ 



fW* 






Recommendations 

Growth, development and maintenance of the integrity of 
environmentally sensitive areas is an attainable end. The 
means of realizing this end includes careful evaluation of 
where to grow and responsive decisions concerning land use 
within the limitations of the physical characteristics 

of a given site. 

It is, therefore, the recommendation of the staff that 
the following suggestions be given careful consideration with 
regard to the sensitive areas within Metropolitan Gainesville: 

1. On a priority basis, establish a program to preserve 
environmentally sensitive areas through purchase, if 
necessary, as funds become available. 

2. Alternatively, if no funds are anticipated, investigate 
the possibility of preserving these areas through 
"Transfer of Development Rights," scenic easements or 
other alternative means. 

3. Designate, as feasible and on a priority basis, some of 
the areas depicted in Figure 13 as green space or very, 
very low density when updating the Land Use Plan. 

4. Sites proposed for rezoning should be evaluated as to 
their sensitivity, along with the short and long run 
benefits/impacts such a change would have on the 

environment . 

5. Utilize the maps individually and in concert to determine 
the most appropriate density and/or intensity of land 
use in response to natural constraints. 



69 



6. Investigate means of decreasing the impact of 
development through regulatory ordinances, 
such as sedimentation, landscape, and flood 
control ordinances. 
In the final analysis it is public opinion with the 
leadership provided by the governing body that will 
reconcile growth, development and environmental quality. 



70 



Glossary of Terms 



Bearing value - the ability of a soil to sustain static or 
mobile loads; the numerical value is usually expressed in terms 
of thousands of pounds per square foot. 

B.O.D.- (biological oxygen demand), oxygen consumed as a result 
of the breakdown of organic matter. 

C.O.D.- (chemical oxygen demand), the amount of oxygen consumed 
by chemical reactions and does not include organic (B.O.D.) 
reactions. 

Depth to limestone - the vertical distance from the surface of the 
earth to the top of an underlying limestone formation. 

Drainage - "Much of the water that falls on the surface is drained 
away by running down the slopes to the lowest places to which it 
can flow, hence the surface water bodies, the streams, lakes and 
swamps, taken collectively, have come to be known as the drainage, 
and the individual water bodies as drainage features." (La Forge, 
Geol. Survey of Ga. , Bull. 42, p. 13, 1925.) 

Groundwater - water encountered beneath the surface of the earth, 
as water in an aquifer. 

Overburden - loose soil which covers a geologic formation. 

pH - a scale used to express the degree of acidity or alkalinity, 
of a given water body. 

Soil consistency - the degree to which soil particles adhere to one 
another; also soil firmness or resistence to movement or separation, 

Traf f icability - the relative ease of passage over an area by foot or 
vehicle. 

Turbidity - the condition of a body of water that contains suspended 
material such as clay or silt particles, dead organisms or their parts, 
and/or small living plants and animals. 



71 



Appendix I 
Methods of Minimizing Erosion, Sedimentation and Runoff 

1. Compile a comprehensive resource plan of the area in order 
to fit development plans to climatic factors, topography, 
soils, and vegetative cover. 

2. Use those areas not well suited for urban development 
for open spaces and recreation. 

3. Remove only those grasses, shrubs, and trees that must be 
removed. Protect the remaining vegetation to preserve their 
erosion-control value. 

4. Divide large development sites into small workable units 
upon which construction can be completed rapidly in order 
to reduce the duration of exposed soils. 

5. Stockpile topsoil for landscaping and protect it against 
erosion. 

6. Install erosion control structures before disturbing the site 
in order to provide for safe disposal of runoff. 

7. Construct roads and storm drains before construction of 
buildings begin. 

8. Protect disturbed soils during construction with mulch or 
temporary vegetation. 



72 



9. Establish permanent vegetation before or immediately after 
completion of construction. 

10. Provide accommodation for increased runoff caused by changed 

1 
soil and surface conditions. 



i^fter Department of Environmental Services, "Environmental 
Criteria for Erosion, Runoff and Sediment Control," Tallahassee, 
Florida, 1974. 



73 



Appendix II 
Interrelationship of Factors Affecting Lake Metabolism 



GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION 



atitud* 




TROPHIC NATURE OF THE LAKE 

Figure 15 



Seasonal Cycl« 
Circulation Stognotion 
Growing Saoson 



Source: Revised after Putnam, et al., "Eutrophication 

Factors in North Central Florida Lakes," Engine- 
ering and Industrial Experiment Station, College 
of Engineering, University of Florida, 1969, p. i 



Appendix III 
Procedure Used for Developing the Wildlife Map 

STEP 1 - Soil 

In order to determine values for the soils found in 
the study area, a numerical rating scheme was devised. The 
basic soil information, i.e., percentage of soil in an 
association, general soil suitability for openland, woodland 
and wetland wildlife, soil name, etc. were obtained from the 
Florida General Soils Atlas, with Interpretat ions, Division 
of State Planning, 1974. The table on the following page 
depicts the rating scheme developed by using the basic 
information found in the aforementioned publication. 

STEP 2 

Pages 77 and 78 of this Appendix contain a description of 
the soil groups found in the study area and are included 
individually in the table on the following page. The number 
to the immediate left of each description on pages 77 and 78 refers 
to the group number. Each group or association will usually have 
more than one soil type. These different soil types were grouped 
by geologists and pedologists (soil scientist) because they have 
similar physical and/or chemical properties. The group numbers 
were used in the table dealing with Alachua County in the 
publication cited above in STEP 1. 



75 



] 
1 
J 



in 

iH 

(d 

Eh 



























c 






V£) 






















■^ E 






r-^ 






















• U 3 


• 



























•0 «3 1 — 


(U 




^ 






















O) O) 


> 




Q- E 






















i- 


•r— 




to >, 






















CL) Qi 


+J 




•—t: IT) 


CVJ 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 


«* 


«^ 


•^l- 


-0 -i^ E 
•I- fO •<- 
CO +J 


•r— 
CO 


un 






















E 




jx: 






















E XJ 


(U 




E 






















•> O) 


CO 




ra 






















+J 4-> 






<y\ or 


•"■ 


■" 


•" 


•"■ 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CO 


CO 


co 


(U OJ O) 


CO 




r-^ 






















OIZ r— 







fO 






















ro »4- 


E 




+-> 






















+j <u 



























' 


E • S- 


CU 




1— 






















to 

S_ 00 -r- 


x: 

4_> 




-0 


























O! 






















OJ 


A 




If- +-> 






















Q. l/) CO 


(U 




CO 






















1 •!— 


i. 




:3 





UD 


CM 





CM 











en 


CO 


I— fO x: 







E •'-, 


Lf> 


in 


CT> 





CO 











^ 





fO r3 1— 


<+- 




3 -0 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 


•*-> CT 


(U 




CXDco «=C 


00 


CO 


00 


CT> 


r^ 


00 


00 


r^ 


r^ 


r>. 


OJ 


CU 




X3 






















CO 


XI 




O) 






















>>••- in 


4-> 




-»->«* 






















^J= • 






CO 1— 






















4-> 


rt 




3 fd 


tn Lo 


^13 


^ 00 





CO r^ CTi 


CO ^ 


<;a- CO 


CO r-. 


.— ^ 


CM ^ 


4-> II 


x> 




•1-3 +-> 


CO 00 1^ 


CJD r^ 


en CM CT> 





CO f— r^ 


cr> CO ^ 


00 r- 


00 r- 


^ 


CO 00 ^ 


•I— •> 


E 




-0 


. • . 


. • . 


. . • 


. 


. 












CO s« 


ro 




r^<: h- 


«d- CM 1— 


•* CM I— 


^ CM r— 


en 


CM CM CM 


•vt 1-^ 1-^ 


in CM 


"^l- CM 


<sl- CO 


CM CM .— 


C7> 
E E CO 
•r- E --^ 






ro 






















•r— 




CO 






















TD =J S« 







.— +-> 






















S_ -r- ,— 


CO 




(0 c 






















> ^ 






4-> -r- 






















-r- U 


OJ 


LU 





CTi CTi r^ 


00 00 


cTi 00 cri 


CT. 


r-^ r^ cr> 


00 00 00 


CO 00 


r^ r>. :r^ 00 


CO 00 00 


CL. T3 Q> 


1 — 


Ll- 


UDH- a. 




' — 


















E -Q 


ro 


h— 4 
























S^XJ •<— 


_i 


+J 






















s- E -a 


+-> 


Q 


x: 






















O) fO 5^ 1 — 


•r- 


_J 


C7) 






















> 3 


13 


1 — 1 


•r-<\J 


in in 


CO CM 


CO CM 





00 .— n- 


CM 00 


CO r^ 


en 1— 


^ CO 


-^ in 00 


— - (U 


U) 


3 


a» 
Ln3 s^ 


in CM CM 


Cn CM CM 


in CM CM 





CO CO CO 


CO CM f— 


r-x CM 


CO CO 


CO 


^ CO 1— 


II E ^ 2 
-M 


-l-> 


O 

1— 










, — 














r- -r- <U 
+-> 1— E 


CO 


r— 1 





























+-> 


-0 






















»> «3 ro 


E 


Q 


ro 


c 






















S_ •<- +J 




a: 


+-> 


«3 






















u +-> 


(U 


d 


•r- 


^— 






















-1-' l/l 


x: 


o 


^ 


-M 






















Q_ CO S- 


-(-) 


LU 


C_> ro 


<U 






















l/) S ••" 




a: 


^OC 


3 


1— I— r- 


1 — ro n 


CO ro «d- 


«;r 


r— r— i"~ 


r- r- r- 


^ ^ 


r— r— 


— 1— 


Nl CO «a- 


II <C H- 

■21 


CO 


^ 


<U 
























CM M- CU 




1— 


M- 
























-E 


t— 


I— * 


•r- 
























• 1— 




3 


TD 


■0 






















•r- E 


CO E 


o 


r— 


na 






















ro CU E • 


(O 


z: 


•r— 


1 — 






















u- u E s^ 


E q: 


1— 1 


3 


-0 






















s- =s 


E 


^ 



























II a> n- CO 


Z3 


2: 


CQ CO 

























d. 


1 — . 


ct 


^ «3 


3 


'd- "^ 00 


^ "^ CO 


ro ro n 


«* 


00 CO «=l- 


^ <* "^ 


CM CM 


CO CO 


•n <* 


\J CO CM 


co^ — >, 


00 


q: 


>> 
























- ' E 


. 

<-3 E 


1 


-M 
























T3 U T- 4-> 


>^ E 


1— « 


•f— 
























00 -r- 


"Xi :3 





1 — 


TD 






















CO CO 


CQ ■— 


on 


A 

u i tab i 


Q. 






















4 = G 
g % As 
f soil 
divide 


s 4A, 
lumn 5 
in CO 




<*oo 





^ ^ ro 


m CO CO 


CO CM CM 


, — 


co 00 "^ 


CO CO CO 


CM CM 


CO CO 


CO CO 


CM CM CM 


.. E 


E cu 


























l/) 'f- TD 

2 -i^ Q. E 


E S- 


• 






















3 ZJ 



























ro 3 fO 


1— CD Ol 




4- 






















1— +J 


E -r- 




CO 






















r— s- n. 


U T- if- 




CO 


000 


in in 


in in 


en 


in in 


CM r^ in 


in 


cn in 





in 


>> CD :3 


>> 




ros^ <3: 


^ CM CM 


«=a- CM CM 


^ CM CM 


r-^ 


CO CM CM 


in 1 — 1 — 


in CM 


in CM 


in CO 


<^ CO t— 


M- XI 
«/) T3 10 CD 


l+- r— CU 

Q-x: 

•r- +J 












Q. 
























E 














rO <U t- 


E +-> 




t/) 








fO 














jE -n- 4-> 


ID 1— CD 




1 — 








S 














<U CO ^ <T3 


CO =5 E 




'r- 








1/1 














i~ 't- -E 


E •-- 



























ro r- <U +-> 


<U V) 




00 




E 




O) 


O) 












Q J=. 
l/) E +J c 


x: >> =J 

+-> XI 




4-> 


T3 







■(-> 


r— -U 













CD -f- 


TD 




C 


E 


E +-> (O 


fO 


(O 


r— E 


JiC 






-0 


fO 


E -M 


(U ID <U 




O) 


-0 n3 


CD-E 


4->r— 


"^ 


•r- rtJ 


a 




s- 


E 




•1— fO ' — 


S- CU -i<: 




c 


E S_ 1— 


-M E rO 


+J 3 OJ 




> r— S- 




r— -D 


cu 03 





fO :3 T3 


+J ro •!- 


(O E E 







CO Qi ^- 


X: •■- CL 


(U-E a» 


j:r 


co l+- O) 


S- OJ i- 


O) -r- 


■ — Jsi 


-0 S- 


-:k1 x: •!- 


(O -^ 


•r- (O 




Q. 


E jE O) 


E (O 


CD U -Q 


CO 


CO OJ x: 


-0 :3 a> 


+J u 


-0 CL 


CU <L> 


-^ a u 


S_ t/) V) 


CO ro S- 




E 


S- U -r- 


•r- 0) E 


en 3 


cu 


E •!- a 


E CDJD 


S- (C 


E 


S- -Q 


n3 =5 03 


•I- 


+J 4-J 







cu s- x: 


I— 1— (O 


OJ ro -E 


S- 


j= $- 


OJ fO 3 


fO 1— 


(T3 a. 


S- 13 


>, <a <— 


1— —J •— 


E X5 CU 




<NJ C_> 


3: <: 


CQ u_ :i^ 


s: 3: 


u_ 


ra t_) <: 


i^ 3: M 


2:0. 


<c 


cc rvi 


S^a. 


rO CT> fO 


•r- S- 


























3 E •• r3 

T3 -r- cu T3 


CU 


• 






















CL to S 




u 






















•n- -M 1— -r- 


•r— 



























> x: Q. > 


1 CO 




CO 






















•r- CD E ••- 


ro CO 1 — 




CO 






















T3 •!- ro TD 


+J -r- .,- 




<: s- 






















E O) X E . 


XT 




(U 






















1— 1 12 LlJ ,t- cn 


1— H- C>0 




I— JD 




























•r- E 




























3 


^ 


cr> 


ro 


CO 


CM 


in 


CO 


1 — 


CO 


CM 


, , 


. . 




.— 00 2: 














^ 








«— CM 


CO <:;r Ln 



2l 



Group Number 

4. Hernando-Archer-Chief land Association: Nearly level 
to gently sloping moderately well to well drained 
sandy soils with loamy or clayey subsoil underlain 
by limestone. 
9. Blichton-Flemington-Kanapaha Association: Nearly level 
to strongly sloping, poorly drained sandy soils with 
loamy or clayey subsoil and poorly drained soils with very 
thick sandy layers over loamy subsoil. 

13. Meggett, var . -Wauchula-Chobee Association: Nearly 

level poorly drained soils with thin sandy layers over 
clayey subsoil and poorly drained sandy soils with a 
weakly cemented sandy subsoil layer underlain by loamy 
subsoil, and very poorly drained soils with very thick 
loamy layers, over sand. 

18. Fresh Water Swamp Association: Nearly level very poorly 
drained soils subject to prolonged flooding. 

2. Jonesville-Chief land-Archer Association: Nearly level 
to sloping excessively drained soils with very thick 
sandy layers over loamy subsoil, and well to moderately 
well drained sandy soils with loamy or clayey subsoil 
underlain by limestone. 



-'■This number refers to the map symbol on work copy maps. These 
are kept at Department of Community Development. The number 
also refers to the group of soils to its immediate right. 



77 



5. Kendrick-Hague-Zuber Association: Nearly level to 

sloping well drained soils with very thick sandy layers 
over loamy subsoil and well drained soils, sandy 
throughout . 
16. Martel-Placid Association: Nearly level very poorly 
drained soils with thin loamy layers over clayey 
subsoil and very poorly drained soils, sandy throughout. 

1. Candler-Apopka Association: Nearly level to strongly 
sloping excessively drained soils with very thick sandy 
layers over thin loamy or sandy loam lamella, and well 
drained soils with very thick sandy layers over loamy 
subsoil. 

3. Arredondo-Zuber Association: Nearly level to sloping 
well drained soils with very thick sandy layers over 
loamy subsoil and well drained soils with thin sandy layers 
over clayey subsoil. 
12. Myakka-Wauchula-Placid Association: Nearly level poorly 
drained sandy soils with weakly cemented sandy subsoil 
layer underlain by loamy subsoil and very poorly drained 
soils, sandy throughout. 



78 



STEP 3 - Vegetation 

The vegetation was mapped and ranked as follows:-^ 

RANK 





Praire 


= 


1 




Lowland Hardwood 


= 


2 




Upland Hardwood 


= 


3 




Agriculture, Pasture, 








Pinelands 


= 


4 




Non- fores ted/Urban 


= 


5 


STEP 


4 - Land Use 







Existing land use was mapped and ranked as follows: 

Woodlands, Marshes, Praires, Lakes, Institutional 

2 
(essentially vacant) , Undeveloped and Vacant = 1 (Rank) 

Agriculture, Pasture, Commercial Forest^ = 3 (Rank) 

Urban/Developed, Institutional (essentially developed) = 5 (Rank) 

Group 5, i.e. Urban/Development, Institutional (developed) 

was dropped from consideration at this point since these areas 

are already developed. Any area which is urban is considered as 

poor habitat regardless of soil and vegetation. 



The major portion of the vegetation map was completed by Mike 
Bordyn, County Forester. 

2 
Information derived from Wetlands Map (this report) and New 

Construction Maps 1970-74, Department of Community Development. 

3 

Information derivedfrom Vegetation Map (this report) and North 

Central Florida Regional Planning Council "Preliminary Plan - 
1972." 



79 



STEP 5 - Composite 

The last step was to evaluate the information and values 
represented by the three maps in concert. To accomplish this, 
combined rankings of the three elements was necessary. Vegetation 
and soil were combined first using their respective values. From 
this one joint value was obtained. Then land use with its 
values was similarly combined to yield a final rank value which 
indicated which combinations of soil, vegetation and land use are 
optimal for the perpetuation of diverse wildlife communities. 
The following table represents the foregoing numerically. 



80 



w 

CQ 



Eh 



en 

Q 

Z 

_J 

Q 



to 



o 

00 



o 

z 
o 

I— • 

I— 

I— I 

QQ 

o 
o 



o 

I— 

LJJ 
CiJ 
LlJ 

> 

o 

z 



o 



o 

z 
o 

I— I 

I— 
< 
z 

»— « 
CQ 

z: 
o 
o 



o 




















z 




















t— • 




















o. 




















rD 




















o 




















q: 




















o 




■— 




ou 


OO 


>* 


Lf) 






_j 




















<c 




















z 




















1— 1 




















u. 




















5: 


















ZD 


C\i 


CO 


^ 


«;a- LO UO 


U3 UD 


r^ 00 








oo 




















::«i 
















■21 




















< 




















q: 














OO 






UJ 




















(/I 


n— 


1 — 


CO 


f— OO (— 


OO 1— 


OO OO 


<: 






rD 














LlJ 






Q 




















Z 














or 






<c 




















_J 














<: 
z 






















i^ 




















z 














cC 






cC 




















_i q:: 














CO 






1 — 1 




















O LU 














q: 






00 t— 




















^^ 1 — t 


r— 


OO 


t— 


ro CVJ «:;1- 


OO LD 


^ Lf> 


13 






• oo 




















uy o 




















LU O- 




















> s: 




















o 




















o 














< 


Ai.niavi,ins dnisy3hdni 






•iZ 




















z 




















< 




' 
















Qc: 




















Lul 




















1— 




1— 




C\J 


OO 


tj- 




Ln 




(—1 




















OO 




















O 




















CL 




















SL 




















o 




















o 




















s: 




















=3 


OO 


^ "d- 


uo 


LO LD 


UD U3 U3 


r-» r^ 1^ 


00 


00 


en 


</) 




















:^ 




















z 




















^ 






















CO 


CO C\J 


*d- 


OO CO 


•:^ OO CO 


^ OO CO 


^ 


OO 


">^ 


—I 




















»— t 




















o 




















oo 




















i«; 




















z 




















^ 




















z 




















o 




















t— H 


1 — 


(— C\J 


1 — 


CO OO 


CO OO "^ 


OO «;d- Lf) 


«d- 


in 


LO 


H- 




















< 




















t— 




















UJ 




















CD 




















LU 




















>■ . 





















T3 

C 
(O 

<u 

Q. 

a. 



2 



0) 






n) 



•4-> 

<U 

CD 



o 

CO 



4-> 

J3 
E 
O 

O 



0) 



c 

(U 

<u 

> 
o 
.a 

0) 



(U 



E 


Cl. 


O 


to 


S- SL 


4- 






<u 


cn*4- 


c 


•r— 


•r— 


^— 


Q.-0 


3 


r— 


O 


• 1— 


S- 3 


cn 






OJ 


r— 


x: 


(O 


4J 


c 




•r— 


0) 


«+- 


E 




*o 


<u 


o 


.c 


(U 


(— -Q 



Appendix IV 

Methodology Used to Determine 
Environmentally Sensitive Areas-with examples 

As stated in Chapter X, a visual and numerical 
approach was used to determine the sensitive areas. There 
was little difficulty in determining which areas were most 
sensitive (darkest) and then delineating the boundaries. 
Differences arose when the priorities were assigned by the 
individual evaluators. In order to reconcile these differences 
or "conflict areas," it became necessary to first determine 
a numerical value for each type of priority area on each 
evaluators map. Three sites were selected for testing purposes 
for each of the four priorities so that a numerical range 
could be ascribed to each priority. With this done, conflict 
areas could be numerically evaluated, a value obtained and its 
correct priority assigned. The Site Evaluation Matrix which 
follows, was designed and utilized to arrive at these values. 



82 






o 
to 



C/D 



CO 

M 

m 
<: 



X 

I— I 






(/) 



_J 


















"u~ 






cf 


GO 


«;r 





^ 


CO 







CM 


~^^ 


^ 




1— 


05 


c>. 





CO 


rH 







m 


~»^ 


CM 




O 


IfJ 


in 


«a< 


^ 


in 




CO 


T-( 


^^ 





r-i 


1— 


• 


•• 


• 


* 








» 


^^^ 








eg 


eg 


CSJ 


CM 








T-t 


::: 


CM 














































^^ 
























^N^ 






OC 


















^^ 






O 


















' — 1 






UJ 1— 


















">>. 






I/) C_) 


















•^^ 






:= <=c 


















-^ 






u. 


in 


in 


in 


in 


in 




in 


in 








Q 


• 


• 


• 


• 


• 






. 


^^ 






Z h- 


iH 


r-i 


t-H 


rH 


r-l 




•«H 


rH 


'v^ 


C/> 




c£ UJ 


















~^^ 


_J 




_J CO 


















~-v. 


<« 


>- 


U- 


















■^ 


I— 


h- 


X U- 


















-^^ 





t—t 


O 




















u. 



a: 





















-^ 


on 




















"^^^ 




Q. 


_l 


















^•^^ 


SI 




< 


















^s^^ 


rD 




h- 


eg 


CD 





in 


«3« 







CO 


•^^^ 


C/1 




o 


CO 


r^^ 





r-i 


^ 







CO 


^^^^ 






»— 


c^ 


t^ 


CO 


CO 


CO 




CM 


C^ 


'-^ 






CO 


* 


• 


» 


• 










"■>.. 






ra 


iH 


r-t 


rH 


r-i 
















CO 


















"^ 






ELEMENTS 
EIGHTING 


»* 


^ 


«»■ 


^ 


CM 




CM 


^ 








x3 


















$ 






>- 


















^>» 






or 
























O LU 


















■•V^ 






CD ZD 


















•.,^^ 






UJ _J 


















■v^^ 






t— ear 


















•V^ 






«a: > 


















^^^^^ 






o 


















■«^ 






>- 
























u. on 


















.»^ 






O O 


















■«.^^ 






o 


















"*>. 






_l UJ 
























■a: 1- 


















^^^^^ 






1— <c 


00 


Oi 





^ 


CM 







CM 


^^^^^ 






o o 


CO 


CM 





fi 


C-* 







03 


.„^ 






»— 


«1« 


^ 


■^ 


^ 


r-i 




rH 


T-l 


-,^_^ 






X 


















^.^^^ 






2: 


















»>v 






ZD ^ 
























CO 




































C^ 










^,^ 









VO 




«a< 


in 












•~^ 







^s^ 




















"-^ 


1-1 




>- < 
q; UJ 


in 


CO 
CO 








CO 

r-i 








^ 






q: 




















v,^ 






tn ca* 


























UJ 




















!]^ 






h- UJ 




t^ 





r-. 


CO 








00 


^ 






<C 1— 


•>* 


CO 


^ 




03 








«a< 


s ^ 






(_3 ►-! 

_J 

«a: —1 




















^^ 


















< 






^ 






rD <c 


CO 












■~^ 






^ 






Q I— 














2 






"-^ 


























^ 






►— 1 






Oi 


CD 



















Q U_ 


(N 






CM 




CM 








1]^ 






z 




















»^^ 






►— t 


r-i 










CO 


































•^ ' 




















<U 


!^ 










C 












c. 


■>>. 


























-^ 








CU 


"r- 










I/) 


s_ 




OJ 




H- 


«+- 


+J 




>> 




u 


TD 


D. 


~^ 


iA 




2: 


•r- 


(D 




C71 




•1- CO 


C 


1 


*N^ 


:3 




UJ 


r— 


-M 


CO 





(U 


^ r— 


«a 


"O 








s: 


■0 


a> 


r— 


r— 


Q. 


O) Q. <U 







•*>, 


"O 




UJ 


■ — 


cn 


•<— 








^ > 


+J 





^>;. 


c 




_J 


'r- 


O) 





0) 


r— 


(O i~ <V 


a> 




*-^ 


<o 




UJ 


:s 


> 


<>0 


ts 


00 


_J 1— _J 


si 


U_ 




_J 





Explanation of Site Evaluation Matrix 

Site Number - corresponds to site numbers on the Index 
map at Department of Community Development. 

Element - The individual element maps. 

Individual Category % of Total Area - Each element map was 
divided into categories (see individual legend blocks) . Each 
category was assigned a numerical value relative to its 
importance when compared to the other categories on the other 
element maps. Individual category % refers to the percent 
each category is of the total area.^ 

Sum Total of Category % X Category Value - Each category 

% was multiplied by its category value. The individual values 

which resulted were then totaled and entered. This approach was 

used to place the individual elements and their accompanying 

categories in relative perspective to one another. The category 

values, for the various elements, are given below in the same 

order as the legend blocks. 

Wildlife - 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 

Vegetation -1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

Wetlands - 1, 4, 5 

Soils - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

Lake Trophic Levels -2, 3,4, 5 

Geology -1,4, 6 

Slope - 1, 2, 5 

Flood Prone Areas - 4 

Land Use - 1, 4, 5 



Areas were determined by the use of a compensating polar 
planimeter. 



84 



^^^^^^^j_^^^e^aent^Bi3hlil}S. " Individual elements were 
also weighted one against the other. The greater the number 
the higher its importance. ^ The possible weightings were 
2, and 4, with 4 being the heaviest weight. 

subtotal - The result of multiplying Element Weighting 
Faotor by Sum Total of Category % X Category Value. 

T^n^^j ^ Offset Factor - The purpose of this factor (0.5, 
1.0 or 1.5) is to bring together the environmental value, 
as well as the land use of the site. If for example, an area 
is urbanized, a land use factor of .5 was assigned. This 
effectively diminishes the environmental sensitivity of a 
given site. If the site is vacant or undeveloped, a factor 

of 1.5 was assigned. This raises the numerical value and 

3 
consequently the sensitivity of the site. 

Total - is the result of multiplying the Land Use Offset 

Factor by the subtotal. 

r: 11 ,T-:iinoc in i-hp Total column. 
Sum of Totals - The sum of all values in tne 

This is the numerical value of a site. 



^This weighting was assigned in --P°"-3^°,*!?|iP^?r?^"^eplIce 
:^^cSprrth1e:hnoli^gi^alirirdeeei:prenf ^:re\o occur^on these 



sites . 



\..e Land Use element was used - determine what the ^and^Use^^^ 
Offset Factor should be. If, for exampre, y j 
Land use Element comprised the "^Dorrty of the site, tn 
Use Offset Factor of .5 was assigned. Similarly, a ^dju 3 
f category 4 yields 1.0, and category 6 yields a 1.5 Land Use 



o 

Offset Factor. 



85 



Each site was evaluated using the matrix. It was decided 
that a Priority 1 site would be one with a numerical total in 
excess of 10,000. Priority 2 sites would be between 8,500 and 
10,000, Priority 3 areas would be between 5,000 and 8,499 and 
Priority 4, less than 5,000. Using this approach, all conflict 
areas were checked and coded appropriately. In all, 245 
sites were checked within the HUD area. The result of this 
analysis is represented by the Environmentally Sensitive Areas 
map (Figure 13) . 

In order to clarify the procedure used in the Site 
Evaluation Matrix, (Table 8) the Vegetation element is traced 
below through the table. 

1. The total area or size of Site 54 was determined by 
using the planimeter. 

2. After inspecting the Vegetation map, it was determined 
that there was 11% of category 1 (non-forested) , 9% 

of category 2 (pineland) , 0?, of category 3 (agricultural/ 
pasture) , 40% category 4 (upland hardwood) , 0% of 
category 5 (prairie) and 40% of category 6 (lowland 
hardwood) . 

3. To determine the Sum Total of Category % X Category 
Value the following calculation v;as made: 1 X 11 + 
2X9+4X40+6X40= 429. This is simply the 
category % multiplied by the percentage. 

4. The element v/eighting (for Vegetation) is 4, therefore 
4 X 429 = 1716. 

5. The Land Use Offset Factor is 1.5 since the Land Use 
is 100% category 6. Therefore, 1716 X 1.5 = 2574. 
This value, 2574, is the numerical value of vegetation 
at this particular site. 

This procedure may be followed for any site, the Sum of 

Totals determined and then depending on the numerical value, 

the site given its priority 1, 2, 3, or 4 as discussed previously. 



86 



General 
Characteristics of Priority Areas 

Priority 1 

Table 9 represents the data from a Priority 1 area. 
Typical of Priority 1 areas are high percentages in the 
category weightings (usually a high ratio in the 4, 5, or 
6 weightings) . Further, these high values usually coincide 
with high element weightings , such as Flood-Prone areas which 
have a weighting of 4 . In addition, almost every Priority 1 
areas has a Land Use Offset Factor of 1.5 which increases its 
numeric value significantly. Finally, the "Sum of Totals" 
of 12,357 places this site in the Priority 1 range. 
Priority 2 

Table 10 represents a typical Priority 2 area. The 
primary difference between this priority area and Priority 1 
areas is that the high percentages under "Individual Category %", 
tend to occur, in the middle of the weighting (3 or 4) with an 
occasional 6. As in the case of Priority 1 areas, the high values 
oftentimes coincide with high element weightings. The "Land Use 
Offset Factor" is typically 1.5, but ratings of 1.0 also occur. 
The "Sum of Totals" for this site was 9,063, well within the 
range for Priority 2. 



87 



d 

09 

■M 
•r-l 

CO 





X 




1— < 




q: 




»— 








SI 


03 


■Zi 




c=> 


M 


1— 


t-l 


ct 


W 


rD 


< 


> 



1/1 



_J 


















-,^ 






cC 


03 


O 


o 


o 


CD 




o 


o 


^^^^ 


r- 




»— 


CO 


CO 


CO 


o 


en 




o 


OO 


^^ — 


in 




o 


CO 


"a* 


r- 


'a* 


CM 




CO 


'a' 


^~-^ 


CO 


x—i 


1 — 


■k 


»■ 


* 


•■ 


•• 








^«^^^ 


. 






CN) 


C^J 


CN 


CM 


«H 








:::;; 


CNl 

tH 




a: 


















:::: 






o 


















— ^ 






UJ 1— 


















'■^ — , 






CO C_J 


















"-^v^ 






Z2 <=C 


















--~, 






U- 


lO 


in 


in 


in 


in 


• 


in 


in 








Q 


• 


• 


• 


. 


• 




. 


• 


— 






Z H- 


tH 


rH 


t— 1 


T-H 


»H 




r-i 


tH 




OO 




cC LU 




















_I 




_J OO 




















<C 


>- 


Ll. 




















h- 


1— 


X Li_ 




















o 


*— « 


o 






















o 


, 




















o 


Q- 


_J 




















2: 




cC 




















rD 




»— 


C<1 


O 


o 


O 


CO 




O 


O 




LO 




o 


CD 


CM 


TT 


O 


CO 




O 


CM 








1— 


c^ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


OO 




CNJ 


CO 








CO 


» 


* 


* 


- 
















r3 


rH 


rH 


iH 


I— 1 
















oo 
























ELEMENTS 
EIGHTING 


"tr 


^ 


^ 


'^r 


CM 


CN 


CM 


•^J" 


^ 






x^ 
























>- 
























on 
























o uu 
























o rD 


















-^ 






LU _l 
























^- < 
















. 


"^ 






cc > 
























<_) 


















■^^ 






>- 


















"■^^^ 






u- q: 
























o o 


















»«,^ 






o 


















^s^ 






_J UJ 


















**,^ 






< 1— 


















-v^ 






h- <: 


CO 


in 


O 


o 


CO 




O 


o 


^«v^ 






CD (_> 


»* 


o 


CO 


o 


CO 




o 


OO 


^^^ 






1— 


^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


«:»' 




tH 




->^^ 






X 


















^^ 






s: 


















'^^ 






=D S^ 


















^««^ 






OO 


















^^ 












CO 


o 












^^ 


o 


^— o 


VD 




tH 


CO 












^ 


CO 




5^ 




















''^'*>. 






Qi LU 


ID 


oo 








O 
CO 








;> 






O CXl 




















^^ 






r n --< 


























LlJ 




















!^ 






1— LU 






o 


o 


o 








o 


■v^ 






<! H- 


^ 




CO 


CM 


o 








CM 


^^ 
















T-1 










'^^ 






























—1 
<a: _J 














< 






■*«^ 






rD < 


m 












s 






























~-^ 






1—* <.J 




















^ 






t— « 












CO 








.^^ 






Q U- 


<N 










tH 








^.^ 






z: o 

t— 1 




















::^ 






























CO 


t^ 


o 




C^ 




O 




-^^ 


o 






iH 


rH 




CM 








o 




::^ 


'S' 




















O) 


5 








E 












c 


~->. 










o 












o 










O) 


•r— 




* 






to 


S- 


"^ 


Cl> 




h- 


f- 


■»-> 




>» 




o 


■o 


D_ 


«^^ 


to 




^^ 


••— 


(O 




en 




•f- CO 


c 


1 


■^^^ 


ZD 




loJ 


^— 


+-> 


</l 


o 


O) 


.C r— 


to 


"O 


•%^_ 






2: 


TO 


O) 


r 


1 — 


a. 


(U CX (U 




o 


■ — 


"O 




LU 


r— 


CT) 


•1 — 


o 


o 


-:^ O > 


+J 


o 


-..^_^ 


c 




_J 


•I— 


<U 


o 


0) 


1 — 


ro S- (U 


cu 


r— 


■^~» to 




LU 31 


> 


oo 


ts 


oo 


— 1 h- —1 


s 


U. 


-^ _J 





CM 
•a* 

o 



W 



m 



X 

•—I 
q: 

I— 

<£. 

o 

►— < 
»— 

< 

LU 

LlJ 

I- 
I— < 
(/) 





_l 


















v.___^ 








ca: 


CO 


rj< 


CO 


o 


<^ 




rH 




■^^ 


CO 






1— 


P- 


l-H 


^ 


o 


O 




c>q 




■k,^ 


CO 






o 


o 


CO 


^ 


CO 


«^ 




en 




■ — ^ 


o 


CM 




t— 


CM 


tH 


CM 




rH 








^ 


05 
























t^ 








q; 


















:^ 








o 


















~>> 








UJ H- 


























oo c_> 


















'-^^ 








rD <c 


















•v^ 








u. 


in 


lO 


in 


in 


in 




. in 












Q 


" 


• 


• 


• 


• 




■ 




— . 








:z 1— 


r-i 


i-l 


tH 


rH 


rH 




rH 




'^ 


OO 






<: LU 




















_l 






_j a> 


















-~^ 


<: 


>- 




Ll. 


















^^ 


t— 


1— 




X l»_ 


















^*^.^ 


o 


» — 1 




o 


















^ 


U- 
O 


o 






















-.^ 


q: 






















^.^ 




CL. 




_l 


















~-^ 


z: 






cC 


















^..^^ 


Zli 






^— 


«;J« 


CO 


CM 


O 


CO 




^ 




^,,^ 


CO 






o 


CO 


r^ 


CO 


O 


CO 




T-\ 




..^^ 








h- 


CO 


o 


CO 


'^r 


03 




CO 




•«^^ 








CO 


• 


•■ 


• 












*«^ 








ra 


tH 


rH 


r-l 












">^ 








to 


























ELEMENTS 
EIGHTING 


rr 


^ 


^ 


^ 


CM 


CM 


oq 


«:*< 


■^ 








x^ 


















'"■^ 


























■^ 








>- 


























a: 


















-«^ 








O LU 


















•^^ 








o rD 


















■^^ 








LU _J 


















■'.^^ 








»— ct 


















-^^ 








<: > 


















^^ 








<_) 


















^^^ 








>- 


















^.^ 








u- q; 


















^.^^^ 








o o 


















^^ 








CD 


















^. 








_J LU 


















■s..^ 








<3: 1— 


















v^^^ 








1— cC 


CO 


CD 


CO 


o 


OO 




r^ 




^.^ 








O t_} 


rr 


CO 


o 


o 


CO 




o 




.^^ 








1— 


CO 


CM 


«^ 


i-H 


•^ 




CO 




^..^^ 








X 


















■^^ 








s: 


















-^^ 








ra ^ 


















~.^ 








oo 


















1 




























..^^ 


^ 






"^JS 


UD 


















^ 


oo 






o^ 




















-^N^' 








>- <c 

CC UJ 


in 


CO 




m 




CM 








^ 








o q: 




















»,_^ 








f n «rr 




























LU 




















v];^ 








k- LU 
















C33 




»>^ 


CO 






cC t— 


•«? 














CO 




^v^ 








oo 

«a: —1 




















'■^ 










r-1 


t^ 


CO 






< 




< 


^ 








=j < 


&\ 


CO 


t^ 


«:3' 






^ 




2 


^^ 








Q I— 


















■^-^ 




























!^ 














in 














,„^__^ 








Q Li_ 


CM 




T-K 














s^ 








z: o 




















-^^^^^ 








t— « 




















.^_^ 










CO 


CO 




O 


00 




rH 




i^ 


CO 








rH 


CNJ 






O 
rH 






CO 




:::^ 
























OJ 


5 












c 












c 


^^^^ 












o 












o 


->^ 










Ol 


•r— 










l/J 


$- 


*..^ 


O) 






H- 


«+- 


4-> 




>> 




u 


■a 


D_ 


-»^ 


t/) 






■2Z. 


•r— 


fO 




cn 




•r- to 


c 


1 


**^ 


rs 






LU 


^— 


■*-> 


(/) 


o 


O) 


JC r— 


«3 


TO 


■ — 








2: 


T3 


OJ 


r-~ 


r— 


Q. 


CU Q. <U 




o 


^^ 


"O 






LU 


r— 


O. 


•r- 


O 


O 


-^ O > 


-•-> 


o 


--^ 


c 




_J 


•r— 


Ol 


o 


Ol 


1 — 


ra S> O) 


O) 




' — 


lO 




LU 


3 


> 


oo 


CD 


OO 


_J t— — 1 


3 


Ll. 


*^ 


-• 1 





Priority 3 

More than half of the Priority 3 areas are in the 
upper portion of the range (5,000 - 8,500). The middle range 
values comprise one fourth of the sites as does the lower 
end. Table 11 is typical of the category distributions in these 
priority areas. 
Priority 4 

Table 12 is representative of a Priority 4 area. The 
highest proportion of the percentages under "Individual 
Category %" is most often toward the lower end of the scale 
(1, 2, or 3) . Concurrently, these high percentages in low 
categories tend to occur with high "Element Weightings." This 
further diminishes the numerical value of the area. The 
"Land Use Offset Factors" in the majority of cases was 0.5, 
which reduces the final value by one-half. A "Sum of Totals" 
of 1,938 places this site in the lower end of the Priority 4 
range. 



90 



CO 
CO 



o 

0) 



C/3 





X 




»— • 




OL 




h- 








s: 


1— t 


■z. 




o 




t— H 


W 


1— 


h-l 


cC 


m 


rD 




> 



Ui 



C/) 




CO 
CO 

o 

<a 
+-• 

•f-i 



o 



a: 
o 






< UJ 

_i c/1 

X U- 

o 



o 
o 

CVJ 



in 

o 



CM 
CO 
CM 



in 

o 



CO 
CO 
CO 



o 
o 
oo 



I— 
o 

OQ 

rD 



to 



CTJ 






C3 

O 






X 

1—4 

0£ 



O 

I— t 

h- 

-=c 

=> 
_J 
<c 

>■ 

LU 
UJ 

»— 

(—1 

to 



>- 

O LU 

o r> 

UJ —I 

<c > 
<_> 

>- 

U- DC 
O O 

_l UJ 
< H- 
I- <C 
O O 



OO 



CM 

in 



in 
o 



in 

CD 



o 

05 



O 
C3 



in 



CM 



^ 



CD 

o 

CO 



o 

CX3 
CO 



in 

o 



CO 
CO 
Oi 



«=1» 



o 

o 



>- <c 

Ol UJ 

o a: 



<£. I— 

O ►-' 

t/1 

_J 

Q »— 
•-• o 



Q U- 
Z O 



CO 



CO 
03 



o 
o 

CM 



_l 

<C 
H- 
O 



OO 



o 



a: 

o. 



o 
o 



>J3 



in 



ro 



CO 






o 



<N 



UJ 



(U 



en 



oo 

CO 






c 
o 

•f— 
4-> 

to 

4-> 
(U 

cn 

O) 



C33 
CO 



o 

00 



CM 

CO 



>> 

cn 
o 

o 
O) 
C3 



O 
OO 



< 
2 



5 



u 

•I— to 
J= r— 

.i«: o > 
(O &- 0) 



o 

o 



to 
■o 

c 
m 

+-> 



c 
o 

&. 

Ou 

I 

-o 
o 
o 



C3 
C3 



l/) 

c 



SOURCES CONSULTED 



Bartelli, L. J., et al. Soil Surveys and Land Use Planning . 
Madison: Soil Science Society of America. 1966. 

Cason, James. "Lake Alice - A study of potential pollution 

of the Floridian Aquifer." Gainesville: Compass. 1970. 

Christensen, B. A., et al. "Identification and evaluation of 

natural detention sites in Hogtown Creek drainage basin." 
Gainesville: University of Florida. 1974. 

Clark, W. , Musgrove, R. , et al. Water Resources of Alachua, 

Bradford, Clay and Union Counties, Florida . Tallahassee: 
Florida Geological Survey. 1964. 



Department of Community Development 



Recreation, 19 68. 



University of Florida and Santa Fe Junior College, 1967. 



Urban Area, 1970. 



Gainesville: 
Commercial Study , 1969. 
Community Facilities and 

Economic Study , 1969. 
Enrollment and Employment, 



Industrial Study , 1969. 
Land Use Analysis , 1969. 
Land Use Plan, Gainesville 

Physiographic Survey , 1967, 
Planning Unit Study , 1968. 
Population Study, 1968. 



93 



Detwyler, Thomas R. ed. Man's Impact on Environment . New York 
McGraw Hill Book Co"! 1971. 

. Beaton, A. "Eutrophication of the St, 



Lawrence Great Lakes." 

. Bylinsky, G. "The limited war on water 



pollution. " 
. Cole, L. "Thermal pollution." 



. Curtis, John. "The modification of mid- 



latitude grasslands and forests by man." 



. Eschman, Donald and Marcus, Melvin. "The 



geologic and topographic setting of cities." 

. Fisher, J. "Wildlife in danger." 

. Holm, L. , Weldon, L. et.al. "Aquatic 



weeds. " 



. McGauheay, P. "Manmade contamination 



hazards to ground water." 

Detwyler, Thomas, et al. Urbanization and Environment . 
Belmont: Duxbury Press . 1972 . 

Flawn, Peter. Environmental Geology . New York: Harper and 
Row. 1970^; 

Florida Division of State Planning. "The Florida general soils 
atlas." Tallahassee: D.S.P. 1974. 

Frye, O. E. "Threatened species of Florida wildlife." reprinted 
from "Florida Wildlife." May 1974. 

Goodman, W. and Freund, E. eds. Principles and Practice of Urban 
Planning . Chicago: Institue for Training m Municipal 
Administration. 1965. 

Hyde, Luther. "Principal aquifers in Florida." Tallahassee: 
Florida Division of Geology. 1965. 

Leggett, Robert. Cities and Geology . New York: McGraw Hill 
Book Co. 1973. 

McAllister, Donald, ed. Environment: A New Focus for 

Land Use Planning . Washington: National Science Foundation. 
1973. 

McHarg, Ian. Design With Nature . Garden City: Natural History 
Press. 1971. 



94 



North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. "Housing." 
Gainesville: N.C.F.R.P.C. 1973. 

North Central Florida Regional Planning Council. "Water and 
sewer development plan." Gainesville: Black, Crow and 
Eidsness, Inc. 1973. 

Pirkle, Earl, C. "Notes on physiographic features of Alachua 
County, Florida." Academy of Sciences Quarterly Journal, 
v. 19. 1956. 

Putnam, H. D. , Brezonik, P. L. , et al . "Eutrophication factors 
in north central Florida lakes." Gainesville: Engineering 
and Industrial Experiment Station, College of Engineering, 
University of Florida. 1969. 

Ryffel, Carleton. "The Location of Industry in Environmentally 
Sensitive Areas." Masters Thesis. Department of Urban 
and Regional Planning. Florida State University, Tallahassee: 
1973. 

Soil Conservation Service. "Urban hydrology for small watersheds." 
Washington: U.S.G.P.O. 1975. 

Sverdrup and Parcel and Associates, Inc. "1974 Drainage." 
Gainesville: 1974. 

Tallahassee - Leon County Department of Environmental Services. 
"Environmental criteria for erosion, runoff and sediment 
control." Tallahassee: Department of Environmental 
Services. 1974. 

"Erosion, Runoff and Sedimentation Ordinance." 



1974. 

Turk, Amos, Turk, Jonathan and Wittes, Janet. Ecology, Pollution, 
Environment . Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co. 1972. 

U. S. Department of Agriculture. "Soil Map, Alachua County, Florida." 
Washington: U.S.G.P.O. 1940. 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for Erosion and 
Sediment Control Planning and Implementation . Washington: 
E.P.A. 1972. 

U. S. Geological Survey. "A primer on ground water." Washington: 
U.S.G.P.O. 1966. 

U. S. Geological Survey. "Gainesville, Florida, East" (15* 
Quadrangle Topographic map). Washington: U.S.G.S. 1966. 
(including corresponding "Flood-Prone maps") 



95 



U. S. Geological Survey 



"Orange Heights." 
"Rochelle." 
"Micanopy . " 
"Arredondo. " 
"Gainesville, West." 



Wermund, E. G. ed. Approaches to Environmental Geology . 
Austin: University of Texas. 1974. 

White, W. The Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula . Tallahassee 
Florida Bureau of Geology. 1970. 



96 



other References 



Bain, Joe. Environmental Decay . Boston: Little, Brown 
and Co. 1973. 

Commonwealth Associates Inc. "Environmental review guidelines 
for extractive operations" (Oakland County, Michigan) . 
Jackson: 1973. 

Dansereaw, Paul. Future Environments of North America . Garden 
City: Natural History Press. 1966. 

Harland, Bartholomew and Associates. "Ecological evaluation, 
Pittsfield Township, Michigan." St. Louis: 1974. 

Leopold, Luna. "Hydrology for urban land planning - a guidebook 
on the hydrologic effects of urban land use." Washington: 
U.S.G.S. 1968. 

National Academy of Sciences. The Earth and Human Affairs . 
San Franciso: Canfield Press. 1972. 

Planning Commission Metropolitan Goverment of Nashville - 
Davidson County Tennessee. "Natural Environmental 
Anaylsis." Nashville: 1973. 

U. S. Department of Agriculture.' "Soil erosion, the work of 

uncontrolled water." Bulletin 260. Washington: U.S.G.P.O. 
1971. 

"Better communities through 



resource planning." 1972. 



sites." Bulletin 347. 1970. 



"Controlling erosion on construction 



. "A framework plan - Soil and 

water conservation for a better America." Washington: 
U.S.G.P.O. 1971. 

Wright, Alexandra, P., Ryffel, Carleton, J. et al . Environmental 
Geology and Hydrology Tampa Area, Florida . Tallahassee: 
Florida Bureau of Geology. 1973 



97 




naps individually and in concert to 
s most appropriate density and/or 
land use in response to natural 

(leans of decreasing the impact of 
:hrough regulatory ordinances, such 
:ion, landscape, and flood control 



lact Which Might Result if Recommendations 



tive areas are to be preserved, then 

uld absorb the land use foregone by the 

rimary adverse impact resides in the 

less sensitive areas could experience 

, even though it v;ould be less 

sensitive area. 

pact : 

eneficial impacts that are expected 

ons become policy include: 

ion of the most environmentally sensitive 



i 
I 
I 
I 
I 



:e of quality of environment consistent 
iesires of the community; 



n